…before the neighbors even had a chance to kill it.

My post from a year ago:
https://backcountrypilot.org/community/ ... tter-26467

I needed to check the status of another slow moving building permit today so I decided to try to submit paperwork to permit the airstrip I had first asked about last year. I don’t know if they just didn’t mention it or if the rules have changed that much since last year, but Fish and Wildlife is more involved now and their habitat preservation requirements are insane.

Without my knowledge or permission, they designated my property protected habitat, so I can’t do anything without committing 2x as much area to be permanent habitat, to be preserved forever. Since I wanted a 2100x50 airstrip, and since they consider anything within 300 feet to be disturbed, they say I need to hire someone to do a wildlife study on about 35 acres, and 2x that much will need to be committed as preserved (unable to be disturbed, ever). In other words, my 100 acre property does not have enough acreage for a 2 acre airstrip.

When I brought up that last issue they offered that I could buy more land somewhere nearby, and commit that as habitat. Big help that is, buy land I can never use but have to pay the taxes on forever. I already own 100 acres that they’ve essentially now stolen at least 2/3 of, why would I spend more so they can take more? This looks like a blatant fifth amendment violation to me, but it’s expensive to make a federal case.

These are all new rules, there was no mention of any such thing when we built our house, driveway, and road here in 2017. Evidently I should have destroyed every square inch of natural vegetation back then when I had the chance.

So there you have it. Land of the free: you’re free to pay taxes and maybe they’ll let you use a little of your own land, but don’t count on it.

.

So after you owned it they changed it? That shouldn’t be something they can do, got to have a major effect on the property value

Maybe call your senator/etc?

NineThreeKilo wrote:So after you owned it they changed it? That shouldn’t be something they can do, got to have a major effect on the property value

Maybe call your senator/etc?

I can try I guess, won’t help though.

Our senators are of the party that has had control of this state too long and would intentionally sell us out to special interest groups. Our local representatives are of the party that’s in the minority in this state and has absolutely no control over whack jobs in the majority.

BigBen wrote:…before the neighbors even had a chance to kill it.

My post from a year ago:
https://backcountrypilot.org/community/ ... tter-26467

I needed to check the status of another slow moving building permit today so I decided to try to submit paperwork to permit the airstrip I had first asked about last year. I don’t know if they just didn’t mention it or if the rules have changed that much since last year, but Fish and Wildlife is more involved now and their habitat preservation requirements are insane.

Looking at the map you posted last year... How is fish and wildlife involved? It looks like dry land that's already being farmed.

BigBen wrote:Without my knowledge or permission, they designated my property protected habitat, so I can’t do anything without committing 2x as much area to be permanent habitat, to be preserved forever. Since I wanted a 2100x50 airstrip, and since they consider anything within 300 feet to be disturbed, they say I need to hire someone to do a wildlife study on about 35 acres, and 2x that much will need to be committed as preserved (unable to be disturbed, ever). In other words, my 100 acre property does not have enough acreage for a 2 acre airstrip.

Yes, they don't need your permission. Nothing would ever get done if they did. It's extremely rare for someone to be able to do whatever the heck they want. There are always zoning rules and environmental rules because when they didn't exist in the past people would do things like build pollution spewing factories next to neighborhoods.

That said, I'm confused how you got to 35 acres. I come up with 40 acres (2700 x 650). What am I getting wrong?

There isn't a 5th amendment issue, for sure. But look at Sackett v EPA from last year and be sure nothing there applies to your issue.

I would bet that a legal challenge could be successful, however you'd probably be broke before it got to far and it could take many years. Seems like that is how many things get done these days. The government may know that their law is unconstitutional, but don't care, you can't fight the government. At least not without deep pockets.

A similar situation happened on a ranch I used to take care of, the county had put in place a "law" that said no building permit would be issued for a property in a subdivision that did not have two routes of entry or exit. The subdivision was created in the early 1980's it was now 2013. The people I ran the ranch for were/ are quite wealthy, wanted to build a house. County said no, because of the "law", the family had an attorney get on it, the county backed down after a few stupid requirements. One requirement was that we gave the fire department access to all our gates on the county road (we never did). As if the fire department would be able to cross 3/4 of a mile of hilly pasture in the winter time with 5 feet of snow on the ground, or any time of year for that matter.

rw2 wrote:

BigBen wrote:…before the neighbors even had a chance to kill it.

My post from a year ago:
https://backcountrypilot.org/community/ ... tter-26467

I needed to check the status of another slow moving building permit today so I decided to try to submit paperwork to permit the airstrip I had first asked about last year. I don’t know if they just didn’t mention it or if the rules have changed that much since last year, but Fish and Wildlife is more involved now and their habitat preservation requirements are insane.

Looking at the map you posted last year... How is fish and wildlife involved? It looks like dry land that's already being farmed.

BigBen wrote:Without my knowledge or permission, they designated my property protected habitat, so I can’t do anything without committing 2x as much area to be permanent habitat, to be preserved forever. Since I wanted a 2100x50 airstrip, and since they consider anything within 300 feet to be disturbed, they say I need to hire someone to do a wildlife study on about 35 acres, and 2x that much will need to be committed as preserved (unable to be disturbed, ever). In other words, my 100 acre property does not have enough acreage for a 2 acre airstrip.

Yes, they don't need your permission. Nothing would ever get done if they did. It's extremely rare for someone to be able to do whatever the heck they want. There are always zoning rules and environmental rules because when they didn't exist in the past people would do things like build pollution spewing factories next to neighborhoods.

That said, I'm confused how you got to 35 acres. I come up with 40 acres (2700 x 650). What am I getting wrong?

There isn't a 5th amendment issue, for sure. But look at Sackett v EPA from last year and be sure nothing there applies to your issue.

The roughly 650x2700’ study area wouldn’t be a rectangle, the ends would be rounded off like a Dr Mario pill shape. 35 acres isn’t exact, but close enough for my point.

Fish and Wildlife is involved because they’re in charge of managing the wildlife that I need to hire a biologist to see if there’s any of in my area. If they found a burrowing owl (there aren’t any) I could never disturb that spot ever, even if I was willing to “mitigate” it.

My area isn’t farmed, it has no irrigation water allotment so it’s traditionally been used for cattle or sheep grazing. Looking at their map, it appears that anything that isn’t actively crop farmed or built on is considered habitat. They will always err on the side of claiming everything they can and then putting the burden of proving it’s something else on landowners.

StillLearning wrote:I would bet that a legal challenge could be successful, however you'd probably be broke before it got to far and it could take many years. Seems like that is how many things get done these days. The government may know that their law is unconstitutional, but don't care, you can't fight the government. At least not without deep pockets.

.

No doubt.

I thought it would be fun and novel to have my own airstrip back when I thought it would cost a few thousand and a little diesel for my grader. Depending on how this plays out, it could be a six figure price tag (for a dirt airstrip!) which of course means it will never happen, which is exactly what they want. I hate giving government what they want.

BigBen wrote:

StillLearning wrote:I would bet that a legal challenge could be successful, however you'd probably be broke before it got to far and it could take many years. Seems like that is how many things get done these days. The government may know that their law is unconstitutional, but don't care, you can't fight the government. At least not without deep pockets.

.

No doubt.

I thought it would be fun and novel to have my own airstrip back when I thought it would cost a few thousand and a little diesel for my grader. Depending on how this plays out, it could be a six figure price tag (for a dirt airstrip!) which of course means it will never happen, which is exactly what they want. I hate giving government what they want.

Back when I had mine, thank god I never asked the king for permission

Did my due diligence, no one questioned, but I’d have gone full on legal offensive if they had

I thought I was ok, but viewed 10k of my money as “insurance” incase some Karen started goining off like a damn smoke alarm

BigBen wrote:The roughly 650x2700’ study area wouldn’t be a rectangle, the ends would be rounded off like a Dr Mario pill shape. 35 acres isn’t exact, but close enough for my point.

Yeah, my math didn't change the equation meaningfully, but you did guess correctly about where I got it wrong.

BigBen wrote:Fish and Wildlife is involved because they’re in charge of managing the wildlife that I need to hire a biologist to see if there’s any of in my area. If they found a burrowing owl (there aren’t any) I could never disturb that spot ever, even if I was willing to “mitigate” it.

My area isn’t farmed, it has no irrigation water allotment so it’s traditionally been used for cattle or sheep grazing. Looking at their map, it appears that anything that isn’t actively crop farmed or built on is considered habitat.

Gotcha. That's wild. Having a small (80 acre) farm that has some tillable, pasture and unmanaged woods, it seems to me that the pasture is 80-90% as harmful to the ecosystem as tilled land.

I assume you've looked into just landing in your field informally? That's what we do. The tillable is alfalfa/grass for hay and I roll it with a converted propane tank a couple times a year on the part that I land. Some states allow this informal use, some don't.

rw2 wrote:

BigBen wrote:The roughly 650x2700’ study area wouldn’t be a rectangle, the ends would be rounded off like a Dr Mario pill shape. 35 acres isn’t exact, but close enough for my point.

Yeah, my math didn't change the equation meaningfully, but you did guess correctly about where I got it wrong.

BigBen wrote:Fish and Wildlife is involved because they’re in charge of managing the wildlife that I need to hire a biologist to see if there’s any of in my area. If they found a burrowing owl (there aren’t any) I could never disturb that spot ever, even if I was willing to “mitigate” it.

My area isn’t farmed, it has no irrigation water allotment so it’s traditionally been used for cattle or sheep grazing. Looking at their map, it appears that anything that isn’t actively crop farmed or built on is considered habitat.

Gotcha. That's wild. Having a small (80 acre) farm that has some tillable, pasture and unmanaged woods, it seems to me that the pasture is 80-90% as harmful to the ecosystem as tilled land.

I assume you've looked into just landing in your field informally? That's what we do. The tillable is alfalfa/grass for hay and I roll it with a converted propane tank a couple times a year on the part that I land. Some states allow this informal use, some don't.

These days it hard to get the cops shop to do anything even when you present them with video evidence of a felony complete with a victim who’ll press charges, now thats bad, but also good for landing a plane on your own property, I figured good chance the PD would “sounds like a civil matter” it if someone whined about it, especially with all the legal landscape landing a plane covers, state/federal/etc, sounds like lots of work

I said in a different thread, when I was regularly landing my plane on a “non airport” I called the cop shop and recorded it, they said they didn’t have a issue, called the environmental agency, no issue, called the FSDO, no issue, for me that was my “permit”

Never had a issue, but I figured if someone actually was able to make a deal over it the recordings of all three would at very least keep me from getting into hot water

Applying to get a permit seems to open more doors to failure, for me permits are a very very last resort

rw2 wrote:

BigBen wrote:The roughly 650x2700’ study area wouldn’t be a rectangle, the ends would be rounded off like a Dr Mario pill shape. 35 acres isn’t exact, but close enough for my point.

Yeah, my math didn't change the equation meaningfully, but you did guess correctly about where I got it wrong.

BigBen wrote:Fish and Wildlife is involved because they’re in charge of managing the wildlife that I need to hire a biologist to see if there’s any of in my area. If they found a burrowing owl (there aren’t any) I could never disturb that spot ever, even if I was willing to “mitigate” it.

My area isn’t farmed, it has no irrigation water allotment so it’s traditionally been used for cattle or sheep grazing. Looking at their map, it appears that anything that isn’t actively crop farmed or built on is considered habitat.

Gotcha. That's wild. Having a small (80 acre) farm that has some tillable, pasture and unmanaged woods, it seems to me that the pasture is 80-90% as harmful to the ecosystem as tilled land.

I assume you've looked into just landing in your field informally? That's what we do. The tillable is alfalfa/grass for hay and I roll it with a converted propane tank a couple times a year on the part that I land. Some states allow this informal use, some don't.

I think I should be ok landing informally, especially if it’s infrequent. I can’t just land informally near my house though, as it’s too rough without some grading, at least for a relatively heavily loaded tricycle Cessna. Our county code specifically allows private airstrips on ag land, so I didn’t think the permitting would be a big ordeal. Things have changed way more than people realize since I pulled permits to build my house in 2017.


Three nine kilo is right about permitting opening more doors to failure.

BigBen wrote:

rw2 wrote:

BigBen wrote:The roughly 650x2700’ study area wouldn’t be a rectangle, the ends would be rounded off like a Dr Mario pill shape. 35 acres isn’t exact, but close enough for my point.

Yeah, my math didn't change the equation meaningfully, but you did guess correctly about where I got it wrong.

BigBen wrote:Fish and Wildlife is involved because they’re in charge of managing the wildlife that I need to hire a biologist to see if there’s any of in my area. If they found a burrowing owl (there aren’t any) I could never disturb that spot ever, even if I was willing to “mitigate” it.

My area isn’t farmed, it has no irrigation water allotment so it’s traditionally been used for cattle or sheep grazing. Looking at their map, it appears that anything that isn’t actively crop farmed or built on is considered habitat.

Gotcha. That's wild. Having a small (80 acre) farm that has some tillable, pasture and unmanaged woods, it seems to me that the pasture is 80-90% as harmful to the ecosystem as tilled land.

I assume you've looked into just landing in your field informally? That's what we do. The tillable is alfalfa/grass for hay and I roll it with a converted propane tank a couple times a year on the part that I land. Some states allow this informal use, some don't.

I think I should be ok landing informally, especially if it’s infrequent. I can’t just land informally near my house though, as it’s too rough without some grading, at least for a relatively heavily loaded tricycle Cessna. Our county code specifically allows private airstrips on ag land, so I didn’t think the permitting would be a big ordeal. Things have changed way more than people realize since I pulled permits to build my house in 2017.


Three nine kilo is right about permitting opening more doors to failure.

I assume you’ve got 2” N numbers on your tail?

I'm in Canada so different rules, but we definitely have way too many rules around land use and airstrips here as well. When I'm using my field as an airstrip I just land in the field and nobody has ever said anything. I've never called it an airstrip or asked anyone about anything and it's worked fine. As long as you get along with your neighbours and aren't hosting big fly in events you're probably fine. As far as smoothing ground, or clearing a bit of brush, I'd do it a little bit at a time on foggy days or at night with no lights. Just make a smoothish driveway where you want to land.

Just do the grading and have the informal strip! Forgiveness not permission! Just tell them you are farming grass and need a smooth surface!

Someone smarter than me can probably recall the FAA requirement for registering a runway, but IIRC it’s somewhere in the vicinity of a dozen landings in a year. A temporary improvised runway is a good thing.

Where it me, I'd beg of the 'powers that be' to make this thread go away.

Being somewhat of a recluse, I'd never host a 'fly in' and I don't do vlog or social media look at me stuff.

I'd grade, compact, or roll my ground how I saw fit, but also in a fashion that drew the least amount of attention to myself. IOW blend it in, you need relatively smooth and flat, you don't need a putting green nor asphalt.

I'd give up on asking anything of anyone, and I'd surely not bring a fight on anyone, that just lights up the arena.

Unless the neighbors are your best friends, do not land nor take off over their home. Ever. If your ship does not have the performance to do that, it's time to up its game, your dream doesn't trump your neighbors. Ever.

A couple years down the line I might get it charted. The feds are not interested in zoning or permits. Getting a few entities crossed up and in conflict gives the talking heads enough confusion to buy you a little more time.

You're only looking to use your dirt in a very special way for a very limited time, your not going to change it irreversibly, and you'll not take it to the grave.

One year has passed since you started on this dream, quit typing and dreaming on it, live it out.

Take care, Rob

Rob wrote:Where it me, I'd beg of the 'powers that be' to make this thread go away.

Being somewhat of a recluse, I'd never host a 'fly in' and I don't do vlog or social media look at me stuff.

I'd grade, compact, or roll my ground how I saw fit, but also in a fashion that drew the least amount of attention to myself. IOW blend it in, you need relatively smooth and flat, you don't need a putting green nor asphalt.

I'd give up on asking anything of anyone, and I'd surely not bring a fight on anyone, that just lights up the arena.

Unless the neighbors are your best friends, do not land nor take off over their home. Ever. If your ship does not have the performance to do that, it's time to up its game, your dream doesn't trump your neighbors. Ever.

A couple years down the line I might get it charted. The feds are not interested in zoning or permits. Getting a few entities crossed up and in conflict gives the talking heads enough confusion to buy you a little more time.

You're only looking to use your dirt in a very special way for a very limited time, your not going to change it irreversibly, and you'll not take it to the grave.

One year has passed since you started on this dream, quit typing and dreaming on it, live it out.

Take care, Rob

The neighbor’s houses aren’t very close.

I guess I mostly started this thread to express frustration about the rule changes. It’s impossible to know what they’re going to take from us next. The ability to grade a little dirt to land my plane is actually the lesser concern in this situation, I bought this land intending to water and farm it someday. Usually freedom to farm land that is already being used for farm activities trumps these kinds of government land grabs, but this time they say it doesn’t. If my water applications go through there’s 80 acres of farmland on the line here, and with rule changes they never tell you about, who knows what the ransom to use my own land will be at that time?

What I know for now is that I can continue to use the land as it’s been used, which is for cattle and sheep. I also know there’s no permit requirement for grading less than 500 yards, which is good because I do some grading somewhere around the farm every year, that’s why I have a grader. I may need a little flatter area to give the livestock some hay this year.

Local elections matter. Everyone gets spun up on red team v blue team but on a day to day basic local jurisdictions affect your life more than federal by a bunch. Participants in government tend to be people who want to do things, think they know more and have a personal agenda most often with all the best of intentions if not results. Those who just want to be left alone generally don't get involved. That is too bad. There is great value in just protecting the status quo and preventing activists from holding the spots. City and county seats, special commissions and zoning boards are not sexy but someone is going to be in those spots. More people should consider filling them.