There's goldfish in the pond at Marietta.

Gump

In followup to what others have stated, here's my opinion of the delicate situation.

1) There is power in support and numbers. The more people that care about these wonderful airstrips the more dog we have in the fight. But, moderation plays a huge part in keeping these airstrips open. I get the feeling that this year is going to be a "test" year to monitor the BC4 closely. We need to be aware of this for the upcoming flying season and use our best judgement/common sense. There are plenty of other great airstrips to visit in the ID backcountry, but I certainly understand the appeal to the BC4.

2) Let's be good stewards of the backcountry and do anything we can to Tread Lightly. If you see a piece of trash anywhere, please pick it up. It takes a few seconds and shows that we are responsible land users. I believe the flying community is great at this, but we can always do better. As others have stated, leave the area better than you found it.

3) We need to do a better job of policing ourselves. In the last few years, a lot of information has become available on how to become a better pilot in the backcountry. Prior to arriving, I feel it is our responsibility to become aware of policies and practices for flying in the backcountry. If you have questions, ask a fellow pilot who is more knowledgeable. Seek training if needed, but most of all, become prepared. Flying the backcountry is not "standard" and may require a little "homework". I can be guilty of this as well.

I for one appreciate threads such as this: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5686
It's nice to read up and understand the hot spots for certain airstrips.

4) One of the best things we can do is actively help out those who maintain and open/re-open new airstrips. Membership and financial contributions are one way, but going out and seeking new opportunities is another. New airstrips will ease the burden on the backcountry airstrips we already enjoy. If you are passionate and dedicated about new possibilities, I have no doubt that your state/local pilot organization will welcome you with open arms. If nothing else, contact the RAF and ask what you can do to help.

5) I am thrilled to see backcountry flying so popular. At times it is a double edge sword, but at least one area of general aviation is growing. The allure of the backcountry is exciting and romantic, something others areas of aviation are not known for.

6) Last year, we did talk about moving the BCP fly-in to a different location, but in the end, JC caters to backcountry pilots in a way that few airstrips do. We felt that being more organized and prepared would alleviate some of the small problems we faced in the years past. But, I'm sure we will once again have this discussion for the for the 2013 BCP fly-in.

7) I would find it odd if any rafter/hiker/hunter that just departed an aircraft at one of these ID airstrips turn around and complain about them. Perhaps some people want it all, but there's always a give and take.

I would like to see a member from the RAF and IAF/IAA to give a presentation about this topic at this years fly-in. I think it would be great for pilots to meet these wonderful people and have them answer real questions from real pilots such as ourselves. Perhaps on Friday night (before the big Saturday fly-out) or Saturday night we can have a presentation/Q&A. I will work hard on this. (PM/email me if you have a contact that would be willing to do this.)

That's my .02
MM

SixTwoLeemer wrote:

S-12Flyer wrote:As an avid OHV user I can tell you it is more of a use it or lose it scenario. The eco-nazis do not care if one person or one hundred people use an area they want closed. They feel that ANY use of the backcountry other than foot traffic is too much. Any positive use that generates local revenue is better than clandestine occasional use. Idaho benefits from any tourism revenue and the way to ensure continued access is to keep the money flowing in.
The eco-nazis are perpetually "pissed off" and nothing we do or don't do will change that. There is no befriending them or compromise with them. They want all access severely limited. The only way to keep it open is continued financial support to the local coffers. Work with the Forest Service and add a clean-up/maintenance day to the fly-ins. Show them that we are good stewards of the area and they will support us. Leave the area better than you found it and it will be harder to shut us out.

+1

Thats exactly as I see it here in Utah.

I see it this way too.

Why is it that a person who lands at mile high and camps has more legitimacy than me if I stop hike for an hour, take pictures and leave. The less time I am on the ground the less impact I have?

+2

I'm going to open a skydive center at Johnson creek!.........and I'm from California......who ever that was that said this year is going to be a test year is right on......The canyons have not gotten any bigger , the amount of people who use them has no doubt grown beyond what the people who pioneered all that zone could ever imagine......Idaho is candy land for the off road pilot, like it or not . it is so beautiful, and so accessible by the mode of transportation we like most ,that people can't help themselves.It is going to be very interesting to see the next 10 Years unfold with all this. It's a very unique place that allows a lot , I'm with SuperMaule on the whole keep it as low pro as possible.I am definitely not a fly in hater. They will continue to grow just like burning man......There is a scary thought.

"Treading lightly" or "Standing up to tree huggers" is not going to preserve our freedoms to use the backcountry, either by air or trail machines.

Be PROACTIVE. Shed some positive light on our use of backcountry places. Earn brownie points with Park services, etc, by leaving evidence of positive activities. Form local flying groups, do cleanups or site improvements, etc, and get some press coverage. Get "the public" to read positive thingies about airplane folks. Find out (ask) what you can do for the Park (or BLM, whatever) folks. Leave evidence, get in the news, whatever, to counteract the negative press.

I say this because it has worked very well for us here in BC. Used to be that lakes in the Parks were off limits except by special permission. Now we have free access to all but a few sensitive lakes. We (BC Floatplane Ass'n) report to the Parks service what we see, good/bad, we do cleanups, send pics. We do work parties with the forest rangers (always fun outings) and earn brownie points wherever we can. We talk about this stuff @ our meetings because we see the loss of use all over the place, and work proactively to keep our freedoms. It's working.

GoTo http://www.bcfloatplane.com & I think you (Joe Public) can read all about it. Lots of good stuff there, but some is limited to members.

I think a good start will be to ban all those airplanes with props breaking the sound barrier.

If we think spending money will appease the non motorized, Serria Club, Wilderness Society, Wild Rivers, dope smoking, birkenstock, oil hating, global warming, communist. You better think again.

I agree, doing touch and goes over and over at the same strips in the Church is where I draw the line.

Land, stay for an hour, leave. That's my right, for now.

Appeasing your enemy's doesn't work. That's why the US Military is around the world killing our enemy's.

The day we are legislated out of the Church is the day I hope the biggest group of wild fires ever seen in the USA breakout and leave it looking like post WWIII nuclear war.

Good day

From IAA May 2012 News Letter:


Pogo may have been right back
in the ‗60s when he said,‖ We
have met the enemy, and he is
us.‖ The issue, again, is the use
of Vines, Dewey Moore, Simonds
and Mile Hi airstrips, known
collectively as the Big Creek 4.
One can argue that the Big
Creek 4 are just airstrips and
should be as open to use as any
of the other strips that were in existence when the Central
Idaho Wilderness Act was signed in 1980, but the Forest
Service Resource Management Plan skirted the issue in
2003 by declaring them ―for emergency use only‖. The
Idaho Division of Aeronautics and the Idaho Aviation
Association protested that status and a verbal agreement
was made to keep the strips open for ―sporadic‖ use and
minimum maintenance until a new plan or addendum could
be written, processed and approved.
The point is, the Big Creek 4 are not the same as all the
other strips in the backcountry. Recent increased usage,
including by large gatherings, many documented on
YouTube, have highlighted the Big Creek 4 to the Forest
Service and they are concerned that we are not honoring
the agreement. Until there can be a legal challenge to their
status or a new Resource Management Plan can be
written, there are limitations on the use of these strips and
it is our goal, for now, to do what is necessary to maintain
the status allowing sporadic use.
The IAA is not interested in playing the role of policeman
in the backcountry, but we are interested in promoting
safe, ethical, and adventurous flying opportunities. In order
to accomplish those goals in the Big Creek drainage we,
the general aviation public, need to regulate ourselves and
not poke the sleeping dog. We are asking visitors and
locals to be sensitive to the limitations placed on the Big
Creek 4 by limiting operations at those strips to occasional
and necessary use. In particular, please avoid the urge to
have multi-airplane rendezvous at these strips or to have
round robin or multiple landing group activities there. The
allure of challenging our equipment and ourselves is
evident but, as in so many things, moderation is the key.
IAA members, please be the leaders in this effort. Keep
the attraction of the Big Creek 4 available to us all by using
some restraint and complying with the spirit of the verbal
agreement with the Forest Service until a more satisfactory
and lasting solution is reached.

In order
to accomplish those goals in the Big Creek drainage we,
the general aviation public, need to regulate ourselves and
not poke the sleeping dog. We are asking visitors and
locals to be sensitive to the limitations placed on the Big
Creek 4 by limiting operations at those strips to occasional
and necessary use. In particular, please avoid the urge to
have multi-airplane rendezvous at these strips or to have
round robin or multiple landing group activities there. The
allure of challenging our equipment and ourselves is
evident but, as in so many things, moderation is the key.
IAA members, please be the leaders in this effort. Keep
the attraction of the Big Creek 4 available to us all by using
some restraint and complying with the spirit of the verbal
agreement with the Forest Service until a more satisfactory
and lasting solution is reached.

Rob,
Isn't that what I was basically trying to say too?

James

Corbett Canyon Merlot from a box rules the backcountry!

OregonMaule wrote:The day we are legislated out of the Church is the day I hope the biggest group of wild fires ever seen in the USA breakout and leave it looking like post WWIII nuclear war.

You have failed the test.

Bah f'ing humbug.
I make it to Idaho once a year and I pay my yearly dues to the organizations that I feel help keep these places open.
Should I only go to one strip a day, or just stay at base camp? F'that!
With a little common sense, I'll see some of my favorite places and some new this year.
I go to the Idaho BCP flyin to see friends I have made here and fly!

I hope everyone does their part to leave a small foot print and enjoy it while you can.

"We are asking visitors and locals" Here we go with more of this you don't live here you can't have the same privledges, shit. Really what is a Visitor? Is there a certain distance or line if I cross I'm a Visitor? We all own these properties but we're ALL visitors. This thread stinks of more " you"re just visiting don't go to my airstrip.

I saw plenty of this shit when I was a kid surfing. Hey that's my wave get off my wave.

Super-Maule wrote:

In order
to accomplish those goals in the Big Creek drainage we,
the general aviation public, need to regulate ourselves and
not poke the sleeping dog. We are asking visitors and
locals to be sensitive to the limitations placed on the Big
Creek 4 by limiting operations at those strips to occasional
and necessary use. In particular, please avoid the urge to
have multi-airplane rendezvous at these strips or to have
round robin or multiple landing group activities there. The
allure of challenging our equipment and ourselves is
evident but, as in so many things, moderation is the key.
IAA members, please be the leaders in this effort. Keep
the attraction of the Big Creek 4 available to us all by using
some restraint and complying with the spirit of the verbal
agreement with the Forest Service until a more satisfactory
and lasting solution is reached.

Rob,
Isn't that what I was basically trying to say too?

James
Corbett Canyon from a box rules the backcountry!

I think it is exactly what your trying to say but it came across as ALL back country strips in Idaho.

So my boy comes with me to JC this year. I would love to take him to Mile High. It is occasional, but not necessary use. So what is a guy to do. I go to JC 1-3 times a year. If I did the BC4 that sure seems to meet the occasional definition.


From Dictionary.com

nec·es·sar·y
   [nes-uh-ser-ee] Show IPA adjective, noun, plural nec·es·sar·ies.
adjective
1.
being essential, indispensable, or requisite: a necessary part of the motor.
2.
happening or existing by necessity: a necessary change in our plans.
3.
acting or proceeding from compulsion or necessity;

I don't think I can honestly say it is essential or indispensable. To be honest the only way it is essential or indispensable is if you engine quits with in gliding distance. That's a million to one.

I am thinking some extremely evil thoughts right now which I will not post.

So how often can you or I go to the BC4 [before they are closed] once a year? once every 3,4,5,or 6 years???

Again thinking real evil shit which I won't post.

OregonMaule wrote:So how often can you or I go to the BC4 [before they are closed] once a year? once every 3,4,5,or 6 years???

Again thinking real evil shit which I won't post.

You are quarinteened to Oregon

Rob, step away from the whiskey.

Seriously, let's all just take a deep breath and step away from the computer. We are going to be okay.

OregonMaule wrote:I think a good start will be to ban all those airplanes with props breaking the sound barrier.

I think there should be a 65hp limit and no 2 strokes for noise control, and a minimum of 35" bush wheels so we don't leave any tracks.

It doesn't seem fair that people who get to come to the Church once a year are discouraged from bagging the BC4 because they come on a busy weekend.

If the people who want us out were truly reasonable they would understand. DIVERSITY and SUSTAINABILITY are their favorite words. So what about the diversity of our chosen mode of transportation and recreation? Does any sane reasonable person believe that airplanes using the BC4 will effect the sustainability of anything in nature?

There are probably only 3 big fly inns a year in the Church. Saturday is the day strips get bagged. 3 Saturdays a year doesn't seem unreasonable.

This is the only chance most of these pilots will get to test thier skills. Many of these guys have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars and years of their lives to get to the level it takes to do the BC4

When locals tell guys who come from long distances not to do the BC4 it leaves the impression that us locals are trying to keep the BC4 open for us at the expense of our brothers from a long ways away. I consider myself a local since I am 2:08 away. I can leave Madras bag the BC4 and be back to Madras for lunch.

As back country pilots we need to band together. A band of brothers. If the anti motor crowd divides us they will conquer us.

I will pledge to only do the BC4 once a year.

wow look at all those planes with engine problems at the same time.


Again thinking some pretty evil shit I won't post

Glidergeek wrote:"We are asking visitors and locals" Here we go with more of this you don't live here you can't have the same privledges, shit. Really what is a Visitor? Is there a certain distance or line if I cross I'm a Visitor? We all own these properties but we're ALL visitors. This thread stinks of more " you"re just visiting don't go to my airstrip.

I saw plenty of this shit when I was a kid surfing. Hey that's my wave get off my wave.

Only So Cal surfers can land at my strip

Tim

Rob said: I think it is exactly what your trying to say but it came across as ALL back country strips in Idaho.

Morning Rob,
I'm not just talking about the Big Creek four. As an example if Salmon Bar, and Sluice Creek on the Oregon side of the river get too much use according to the Forest "Circus". They will consider closing them too. I've had discussions at work with both the FS and BLM about this exact issue. Those airstrips are on your side of the river. Remember when the a-hole rafters, or jet-boaters piled up rocks for you to find on the Salmon Bar airstrip? And isn't the FS trying to close down some airstips on the John Day River too.

There is also talk about limiting aircraft operations at the Moose Creek airstip, so it isn't just the Big Creek four. The FS has way too much power over these airstips, and can close them at will. Look at the Rogersburg Airstip. It is closed all winter for some eagle nesting habitat BS. Heck there isn't even at tree at Rogersburg.

A lot of people simply don't like airplanes or are just jealous. I don't like horses either, but sure could use one as a pack animal occasonally. Horses have a bigger impact on the Wilderness than airplanes, but I don't want to limit the use of horses.

There are very few pro-backcountry flying folks where I work and even less at the BLM & FS. I hope to put my efforts behind re-opening the Riggins Airport. On another note, I'm off for Oklahoma City Monday morning for a 10 day "Next-Gen" Course. The future of VFR General Aviation does not fair well with the new "Next-Gen" ATC system. Again (don't shoot the messenger).

So anyway I'm headed out for some whitewater kayaking this morning to clear my head. Have a good week and don't go Dr. Evil on me Rob.

James

SOoooo, the obvious solution is to greatly increase the number of strips-to spread the use around-so no single area gets 'overused'?......

The Public Service Announcements on our local radio stations play repeated varied messages about "Go to the 'Natural Areas', and acquaint yourselves with the 'Wonders of Nature'". I believe the making of these ads are at least partly funded (and/or encouraged) by federal dollars.....
I think whats illustrated is the government is showing its 'split personality' by trying to cater/appease too many of the VARY vocal small interest groups-and at the same time trying to show good 'usage' numbers to justify their budgets.They would appear to want us the enjoy 'Natural Areas' by looking 'in' with strong binoculars.

When I was considerably younger I occasionally enjoyed 4x4 exploring of beautiful remote areas that had old logging roads and other means of access. Then 4x4ing became 'cool', and young 'idiots' started using their rigs and high horsepower to tear up/trash places that were nice. Plus chain saws became affordable to the 'common man' and these would be used occasionally in wild/remote areas to do 'stupid stuff'. Of course the 'dumpers' were a problem, too (avoiding inconvenience of-and fees at-landfills). During the several decades since then, this kind of stuff was used as justification for closing HUGE, HUGE areas to 'the public'.

I DO NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN TO OUR VARY LIMITED 'AIRPLANE ACCESS' TO BEAUTIFUL REMOTE PLACES!!
We need to rid ourselves of that urge to 'rattle the valley' with our supersonic prop tips-and their ability to 'piss off everyone in the valley that isn't in that airplane'! 'WE'-with that type of behavior-have become part of 'the problem'!
Also some of the groups that meet are more about 'the flying' than about 'the place'. To them It is just a cool place to do that flying. Then they fly in and out all day long, coming and going in twos and threes, comparing each others airplane performance-or whatever. I was at JC at the same time as a Vans-RV group, and that same group of few pilots/airplanes zoomed in and out all day long. Sorry, I feel this type of event-one that is all about the 'airplanes' -belongs a a normal airport. I personally see JC primarily as a place to enjoy 'the location'. I, even as a pilot, see that behavior as 'abuse of our privileges', and if that type of thing continues, is likely to be some of the evidence that is used against us.

Just sayn'...
lc