S-12Flyer is right on the Money. I've attended several land use meetings regarding Dirt Bike Trails and Offroad trails over the years and the outcome is always the same. It's a win or lose situation and no compromise in between. Once these strips are gone they will be gone forever. If you want to do anything to help and save them, support the agencies that are our voice in the matter.

Kevin I agree with you the numbers are probably not accurate but I do know the weather this spring in Idaho has been miserable and not many people are out flying just yet. As soon as it finally decides to be Spring I suspect you will begin to see a lot more traffic at JC as well as the rest of the Backcountry.

Amen X whatever we are up to now. (You get the point).

Awomen

Hello Backcountry Pilots,

It looks like the "Idaho Airborne Off-Road-Park" types have now exceeded 10% and are now running about 40% or more. This is disapointing and obviously could have bad results. There are 52 weeks in a year to spread the use. Just my two cents.

James

Super-Maule wrote:Hello Backcountry Pilots,

It looks like the "Idaho Airborne Off-Road-Park" types have now exceeded 10% and are now running about 40% or more. This is disapointing and obviously could have bad results. There are 52 weeks in a year to spread the use. Just my two cents.

James

The motocross term is the old BCP guys, we have turned over a new leaf. The motocross commit was meant to be a joke. I have traded PMs with several who have said they won't be doing BC4 at the fly in.

I tried to get in today but the clouds won. It was so close, the holes closed up 25 miles from the area. I'll do my BC4 another time not at the fly in.

James we are on board with you. I think what we are saying is it doesn't matter what we do the groups who want us out will ALWAYS!!! want us out. They don't compromise.

G'Day

I have an idea! I won't disclose where but I'm going to buy a bunch of land somewhere and make a Strip circuit .... Kinda like 18 holes of golf...people can bring friends in trailers ect.... Airstrip after airstrip overlaping one another... Many different approaches to each ....obstacles ( junk cars,power lines on some... Dogs goats) ...there will be huge x's on every runway because they are all closed... Land at own risk kinda thing. You will also be shot at on approach .This type of place would be very fun.Kinda like a Motorcross track for airplanes.This thread is getting depresing.it is an excellent topic I must say. I feel like I'm supposed to pick a side.......oh and my new airplane facility probably won't be too far east of Reno.

Hopefully no matter where people may choose to land their airplanes they do so with the upmost respect for everyone and everything around your chosen place .The airplane community is very small . The majority hates us .I try and remember that everywhere I take my airplane.I want my kid to have a chance to go out and shred in the plane. I also would like him to see Idaho from an airplane, please let's not fuck this up.

Hey Rob,
Sorry man, didn't mean to piss you off. This has been a lousy week here in OKC. If you want to raise your blood pressure, google the FAA's new "Next-Gen" ATC system. This new GPS based ATC system is great except it includes electronic "user-fees" and manditory expensive avionics upgrades. These avionics upgrades will be required by any aircraft that operates where a transponder is required now. This could kill even more general aviaiton. It becomes law in 2020. NOT GOOD!

James

Super-Maule wrote:Hey Rob,
Sorry man, didn't mean to piss you off. This has been a lousy week here in OKC. If you want to raise your blood pressure, google the FAA's new "Next-Gen" ATC system. This new GPS based ATC system is great except it includes electronic "user-fees" and manditory expensive avionics upgrades. These avionics upgrades will be required by any aircraft that operates where a transponder is required now. This could kill even more general aviaiton. It becomes law in 2020. NOT GOOD!

James

I'm not mad at you James. Next -Gen don't look good at this point

Cheers

low rider wrote:I have an idea! I won't disclose where but I'm going to buy a bunch of land somewhere and make a Strip circuit .... Kinda like 18 holes of golf...people can bring friends in trailers ect.... Airstrip after airstrip overlaping one another... Many different approaches to each ....obstacles ( junk cars,power lines on some... Dogs goats) ...there will be huge x's on every runway because they are all closed... Land at own risk kinda thing. You will also be shot at on approach .This type of place would be very fun.Kinda like a Motorcross track for airplanes.This thread is getting depresing.it is an excellent topic I must say. I feel like I'm supposed to pick a side.......oh and my new airplane facility probably won't be too far east of Reno.

This is why I'm spending my flying time at places like Fields Station, Denio, Rome Station, and Mina. You fly in, taxi up, and the local residents, business owners, and law enforcement come up and say, "This is cool, what can we do to make you come back for more visits and spend more $$$?" These people would love to see 150 airplanes come in and swarm the place.



Gump

Denio! My stop to ID and back. Is go to Fields but need premium

Super-Maule wrote:Hello Backcountry Pilots,

It looks like the "Idaho Airborne Off-Road-Park" types have now exceeded 10% and are now running about 40% or more. This is disapointing and obviously could have bad results. There are 52 weeks in a year to spread the use. Just my two cents.

James

Somehow I got confused. All this time I thought this was a Backcountry Pilots forum.
No one is suggesting that we intentionally piss-off anyone. The point is that we need to enjoy all the available strips we can while we still can. We need to be pro-active with the right groups and support the right politicians. Why is it that one state is now more important to protect than any other? We all love to see Swingles latest videos or the latest Long Props fare. But what ever you do, don't post one of mile high. Why no concern about the fly-in at caveman and the surrounding locals. Lord knows we have been battling the eco-snobs for decades around here. The hypocrisy is saddening. We welcome any and all to enjoy the strips around here and even have a poker run to help people bag some cool strips. No mention of motocross or irresponsible 10%ers. Just good times and new friends.
Well I will do my part and stay away. I'll fire up the MX plane and bag a bunch of remote strips locally. I will feel terrible about it and wallow in self pity. But I will do it anyway. I can't help myself. It's a sickness.

Oh and many of the precious Idaho strips are not useable 52 weeks in a year. Far less. Unless you are suggesting that we use them regardless of conditions.

130 post and 3500 views...Sad this thread is still going. I think everyone gets it! Lets move on...geez

Everyones mission is different. If your only allowed to hit a couple of strips each day, well good for you. Were is that posted? Again personally, I would like to leave at 7am and hit every strip around within 50 miles that day if possible. You dont go play golf and hit only 3 holes...its 18! In Idaho it can easy be 20 plus a day. How many books, articles, fillms, etc., are there promoting these strips and how to fly them safely. And now we are only rallying to land there with a plane or two every so often? come on now...Even those that say the big 4 are not on there list this year...I know for a fact its all we think about. If not, your on the wrong web site.

Everyone is welcome to the come fly the strips here in the Sierras we have worked so hard to open! Personally I would like to see 100 planes parked a mile high...and have them all from Kalifornia... (shit I am not even from Kalifornia, I just take up space here part of the year). That would probably pss a whole lot of folks off but why? Get over it...enjoy responsibly and dont condone those that are idiots and disrespectful.

How about a fly in at Mina or Denio? Seems like a great idea...

Speaking of Sierra strips Kev, we need to get a fly in on the books so all of us married, working, dads can get a hall pass. I am voting a Frenchman's fly-In in the late summer/early fall, with daily poker runs to North and South Circuits (maybe a poker run circuit for big tires and one for small tires). Or, maybe that cool private place with the hot springs you talked about. Not THAT deserves a thread with 135 posts!

aktahoe1 wrote:130 post and 3500 views...Sad this thread is still going. I think everyone gets it! Lets move on...geez

Everyones mission is different. If your only allowed to hit a couple of strips each day, well good for you. Were is that posted? Again personally, I would like to leave at 7am and hit every strip around within 50 miles that day if possible. You dont go play golf and hit only 3 holes...its 18! In Idaho it can easy be 20 plus a day. How many books, articles, fillms, etc., are there promoting these strips and how to fly them safely. And now we are only rallying to land there with a plane or two every so often? come on now...Even those that say the big 4 are not on there list this year...I know for a fact its all we think about. If not, your on the wrong web site.

Everyone is welcome to the come fly the strips here in the Sierras we have worked so hard to open! Personally I would like to see 100 planes parked a mile high...and have them all from Kalifornia... (shit I am not even from Kalifornia, I just take up space here part of the year). That would probably pss a whole lot of folks off but why? Get over it...enjoy responsibly and dont condone those that are idiots and disrespectful.

How about a fly in at Mina or Denio? Seems like a great idea...

I feel like this, but the results will be the opposite of what me and you want. The fact of the matter is we are at war with groups like this.

Greenpeace
Sierra Club
Natural Resources Defense Council
Environmental Defense Fund
The Nature Conservancy
National Audubon Society
North Cascades Institute
Earth First
Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust
Earthjustice
Alaska Wilderness League
Center for Biological Diversity
Northern Alaska Environmental Center
Pacific Environment
Northwest Earth Institute
Lower Columbia River Estuary Program
Salmon Watch
Western Rivers Conservancy
1000 Friends of Oregon
American Rivers Inc
Center for Earth Leadership
Friends of the Columbia Gorge
Pacific Rivers Council

The list goes on and on and on. So what do we have? IAA AOPA Blue Ribbon IAF RAF and a few more.

How did the US win the cold war with Russia? We just out spent our enemy's. There is no way we can match the war chest the eco nazi's.

How do you beat them? Take a lesson from history and how small groups take on Goliath.

G'Day

OregonMaule wrote:How do you beat them? Take a lesson from history and how small groups take on Goliath.

G'Day

Throw rocks at 'em?

I'm starting to DISLIKE Burning Man!!! If the greenies and eco freaks don't like us airplane type flying in the back country, I don't like all them hippies making all that dust, noise and the burning of all that wood that came from the forest on a dry lake bed in northern Neveda!!!!

Oh..... how about the pollution from that burning wood????? What a bunch of flippin hypocrites!!!!

I would caution against taking this thread in the direction of a culture war. There's nothing to be gained. Don't make yourself a target to the ignorant who would otherwise not notice.

Everyone here high fived each other when they arrived at the conclusion that the opposition will not compromise on access. All that accomplishes is the realization that you can't expect any relent from the opposition. A campaign of complete anti-environmentalism won't get you very far because the concept of conservation is still very valid, it's just that the groups you've identified have taken it to an extreme and unreasonable degree. One could argue that the Frank Church is still Quiznos/Starbucks/housing development-free due to its land use designation, so we do benefit somewhat from conservation efforts. That's a philosophical discussion and not of much use for the front burner issues.

The biggest threat is that one of these groups spins our activities into something that it's not, that they start a negative image war against backcountry aviation, and then garner the support of the general public who've no opinion on the matter. We [aviation] ride a very tenuous line with the layman as it is, depending on who you talk to. A few extreme people can spearhead legislation, but without the support of the masses, can be defeated as long as it's not some back room secret legislation. Once the general public thinks you're a problem though, look out...convicted in the court of public opinion, and the victor is usually the first to throw a stone. About the only thing we can do is compile and document every single positive impact backcountry aviation has had on the disputed areas, and maintain our own stats and records to show that thousands of Goodyears or Bushwheels have touched down at __________ and it still looks pristine and untouched.

I don't know what the offensive for us would be. We're already in there (Frank Church wilderness) so we're automatically forced to play defense to defend our access. All we can do is monitor efforts to regulate us out of the backcountry and fight them to the extent that we're not challenged again. On a national level, once closed areas have been re-opened in the past, have they not? Can we continue to appeal to the BLM and USFS to regain access to closed areas? Better than standing around with our pants down calling people nasty names.

very good points Zane. wish more folks felt like u do. the wilderness in idaho is for everyone, and belongs to everyone. that respect thing will buy us the max in years to use and not abuse. the families that float the rivers, hike the trails, whether on horseback or foot travel, have the same right that we do...regardless of any group or association they might belong to...we are ambassadors for our mode of travel, like it or not. i noticed the above posts about not flying the big 4 during the flyin and etc, but i would still do it if u see fit. heck, they are there and we are legal. land 'em...! we dont leave garbage, or bent airplanes i hope, and we stay on the runways as we should. maybe our donations per our raffle could be directed towards our two favorite groups as usual, but with a special request to see if we can help open MORE strips. old ones, like the falconberry, or a couple of old ones in the selway..maybe even HOODOO and there are others...just an idea...putting our best foot forward, we can offer to rehab them by hand and pick up any expenses for incidentals...carry on, see you all in a couple weeks....

jomac wrote:the wilderness in idaho is for everyone, and belongs to everyone. that respect thing will buy us the max in years to use and not abuse.

I'm still scratching my head over it all. A few simple comments about how to easily reduce noise impacts on other wilderness users suddenly turns into a 'culture war' and the wagons get circled like its some sort of threat to Idaho aviation. I'm still trying to find where the suggestion was explicitly made to avoid airstrips altogether due to guilt about impacts. I believe the idea was to be generally aware of how to reduce unnecessary noise and avoid large moving airshows, where loitering and extended noisy periods are part of the deal.

I think common sense (and the law) will prevail to protect Idaho aviation, just as it has 97% of the time over the decades, and I think this could include the evolving future of aviation gatherings. But only if they can acknowledge the very real political and historical realities of the area.

I've enjoyed the RONR, Sawtooth, and Selway complex since 1974 on family pack trips, and have been flying in it since 1982. Lots of people around today have enjoyed the area long before that, probably including a few folks here at BCP. I remember going on a picnic with Frank Church himself in the late 70's, and recall what a huge deal it was to create the wilderness at all, given the economy, the simultaneous regional collapse in the forest products, mining, and ag economies at the time that was gutting families' livelihoods including that of my own family, and everything else that was happening in the world. I remember that, even in the face of the incredible commercial opposition, Church got the support necessary from a wide range of regional primitive area user groups to dream a little and craft the plan that we have today. The RONR would not be there without the jet boater or aviator interests included alongside the more wilderness purist user interests...period.

It can never be repeated. The FCRONR is the way it is because of a complete unrepeatable historical fluke. I, along with a lot of aviation, boating, hiking, hunting, and science folks I've met over the decades happen to think the least we can do is accept it the way it is and leave it the way we found it. I don't think that's such a hard concept, and I don't think that will 100% satisfy 100% of the aviation users, 100% of the hikers, 100% of the jet boaters, etc. But it's fine with me. If we open up the door to re-negotiation of the wilderness status to tweak access one way or the other, the magic of compromise could very well collapse. I prefer it the way it is.