I've seen some reports - not many- of pilots who have landed on State or Federal lands in the US (military, wildlife refuges, national parks, national monuments, etc.) that got into trouble.

When were those prohibitions established? Is there a public data base that tracks those events?

don't know about the public lands but don't land on tribal land.... if they want to they can keep your airplane...

Unfortunately, it's not that simple to figure out. A few points:

Landing an airplane in National Parks or National Wildlife Refuges in the Lower 48 states is GENERALLY prohibited. There are exceptions, but very few. For example, you can land a seaplane within the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge on floats, but only at the town boat launch site at Fort Peck. etc.

But, in Alaska, landing an airplane within the boundaries of a National Park or Wildlife Refuge is GENERALLY permitted. There are also exceptions there, where aircraft operations may be prohibited, such as the Kenai NWR canoe trail lakes, where seaplanes are prohibited, but that's a very small portion of the refuge.

As to where these regulations are found, they will generally be listed in the agency regulations. For example, 16 USC CFR 50 contains the general regulations for National Wildlife Refuges. Here's the section from that regulation regarding the operation of aircraft:

§ 27.34 Aircraft.
The unauthorized operation of air-
craft, including sail planes, and hang
gliders, at altitudes resulting in har-
assment of wildlife, or the unauthor-
ized landing or take-off on a national
wildlife refuge, except in an emer-
gency, is prohibited. National wildlife
refuge boundaries are designated on up-
date FAA aeronautical charts.

Since the Fish and Wildlife Service does have search and seizure authority, the MAY seize an aircraft that illegally landed on a Refuge. If that were the case, the US District Court would eventually either return the aircraft to the owner or forfeit it to the government.

BUT, again, this regulation applies ONLY to refuges in the lower 48.

In Alaska, the requirement to make all refuges and parks/monuments open to aircraft landings was specified in the Alaska National Interest Conservation Act (ANILCA), which went into effect in 1980. That Act established or re-established ALL National Wildlife Refuges and National Parks in Alaska, and one provision was that aircraft landings are to be permitted, EXCEPT as necessary for management purposes. Here's a web link for information on specific areas: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/he ... ies/parks/.

But, understand that there are Refuge and Park specific regulations as well. Those were promulgated for some specific reason....a closure of the wilderness canoe route in the Kenai NWR, for example. SO you also have to look at Refuge and Park specific regulations.

Then there's National Forest lands and BLM managed lands...... Again, in Alaska, those lands are almost universally open to aircraft landings. Again, helicopters require special permits, just like parks and refuges.

But, in the lower 48, I think you'll find that GENERALLY, most forests and BLM lands prohibit aircraft landings. Again, I'd go to the specific unit and ask them. And, by the way, ask them for the regulation citation.....a few managers have been known to quote theory as policy.

As to Indian Reservations, don't even think about going there, unless you are landing at a public airport, on privately owned lands within the reservation AND have an invitation. Reservations in the lower 48 are sovereign nations, which means state law may or may not apply there, but basically if you land your plane on their land, they may keep it, they may disassemble it and get it off the reservation, etc. Some folks in Minnesota found this out the hard way a few years ago. Got the plane back, but.....

So, it's complicated, unfortunately. The regulations are generally in the agency's "organic act" and regulations promulgated under that Act.

Good luck.

MTV

From the Wilderness Act of 1964:

I have heard it stated that no helicopter rescues are allowed in Wilderness areas.
NO motorized ANYTHING: I know people who do trail work in wilderness areas and they are not allowed even chain saws.

PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN USES
(c) Except as specifically provided for in this Act, and subject to existing private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness area designated by this Act and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act (including measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area), there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area.

When Cabin Creek in Idaho was finally allowed to be re-built it had to be done with mule teams and hand tools.

Having never asked, I have little experience with Federal or State rules. I taught at Tohatchi High School on the Navajo Reservation fourteen years and kept my airplane tied out on 2600 usable feet of an abandoned road there with the permission of Ernest Becenti, the local Navajo Tribal Chapter President.

The Navajo are the only tribal group I know of that did not incorporate as a part of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934. That leaves them today as wards of the United States Congress under the Treaty of 1868. Wards is an archaic term and tribal sovereignty is actually stronger than state government. In the early thirties the Secretary of the Interior was thrown off the reservation because of the federal government's stock reduction program of that era.

I found Navajo government very conservative but easy to work with. Alcohol was illegal anywhere on the reservation. While small in total population, a very high percentage of Navajos of voting age voted in every election. Many politicians running for tribal, state, or federal positions pressed the flesh at Tohatchi every election cycle. By the way, if you visit Navajos you know or have any connection with, shake all hands including children. It is expected. Don't pump. Just a wet noodle holding of hands a bit. Say, "yaa tay" phonetically with a diphthong on the a in yaa and a guadal stop on the t. Just stick the gap between the ya and the tay way up in your nose. Ya te hey is an a small village north of Gallup but the kids called it JB because J. B. Tanner had a Trading Post there.

I'm a big fan of the Tony Hillerman novels which are set on the big rez.
He has spelled the Navajo greeting as ya-ta-hey, ya-a-tay, and ya--tay, in various novels. I don't know if his spelling evolved over time or if it was just what he happened to type that day.
From those books, it was my understanding that traditional Navajos prefer not to shake hands-- but when they do, they do prefer the "limp noodle" you describe.

He was using the different dialects from various parts of the reservation. Lots of distance, one person average every seven square miles when I was there, and poor transportation.

While the dialect varies, the strong cultural standards do not. All point with lower lip. Pointing with extended hand and finger brings too much attention to oneself. When you ask a question in class and someone answers wrong, you have to give the answer. If you ask the class again, no one will answer and show the first one to answer up. If "cousin coyote" crosses the road, you wait an acceptable time and then continue. Or you can take a different route. If you stop at a convenience store (McDonalds meals provided by voucher) on the way back from a 200 mile away basketball game, don't worry about the kids you know have no money. Every kid will come out with the same amount of snacks and drinks. Fire dance, sing, or ye bi shea is available for cures. Or using a medicine man who knows the right song, you can witch an enemy. Takes nine days, old guys paint the sand floor of the ceremonial hogan with a picture of where some ancient hero did it right (sprinkle colored sand), everybody else has a get together, last day the patient does sweat bath and sits on the sand painting and repeats the sacred names and secret songs given by the medicine man. If it doesn't work, the medicine man got it wrong or the diagnostician (hand shaker) recommended the wrong medicine man.

The kids were much more outgoing on the reservation that in town. Town, unfortunately was for drinking. Lots of even 9th grade students came into class on Tuesday. "Where were you yesterday?" "Thrown in." Protective service; it was called in Gallup. One with nature religions are good philosophy, but provide little direction in life. Traditional kids assume there is nothing that can be done about their alcohol problem. Heroes didn't drink. Thus, there is no medicine.

In addition to the BLM, don't forget that there is also the Bureau of Reclamation.

soyAnwarchisto wrote:In addition to the BLM, don't forget that there is also the Bureau of Reclamation.

Yep, and now National Marine Fisheries has got into the airspace management business (as in restricted airspace) with some of their marine sanctuaries.....and they don't even own any land!

MTV

Does anyone know of any publicly accessible data base or reports that contain info on pilots who have landed illegally on public or private lands? I've seen some reports, and have heard some stories, but have never found any "data".

It seems like regulations vary quite a bit between agencies (NMFS, USFS, BLM, NPS, etc.) and Tribal governments, and between the lower 48 and Alaska. The data block on sectionals for the lower 48 says landing on USFS, BLM, or NPS requires prior permission. Last year someone landed on the Umatilla NF south of Pendleton, Oregon and I saw a news blurb (detail free, of course!) that the pilot was cited and penalties followed. That got me wondering how many of these instances occur? Dunno. It's a big gray area.

wannabe wrote:I have heard it stated that no helicopter rescues are allowed in Wilderness areas.
NO motorized ANYTHING: I know people who do trail work in wilderness areas and they are not allowed even chain saws.


When Cabin Creek in Idaho was finally allowed to be re-built it had to be done with mule teams and hand tools.

There are helitack crews in wilderness areas all fire season. As for trail work, I've seen the use of wheelbarrows to haul dirt be the subject of impassioned debate among USFS contracting officers. One even briefly objected to our use of dump panniers on our mules. His own son got caught brushing trails with a chainsaw. We happily used 2 man crosscuts with an inner tube as the other man.

There used to be a hunting lodge at Cabin Creek, with a large great room, rock fireplace, large kitchen, parquet floors, running water, the works. It was removed, and the area naturalized along with large substantial outbuildings with the help of a Cat tractor that had been there for decades after having walked down Big Creek to the ranch. The tractor now lives at the bottom of a pit it dug adjacent to the airstrip.

Have a look at this. I carry it everywhere I go. Don't go calling your local FS office to bring unnecessary attention to it but instead print it out and carry it with you.

Seems to me the world is wide open. Someone please correct me. Doesn't mean you should go land in front of a bunch of ground loving people enjoying themselves either but I can't help but read this and thinks it's in our favor.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

aktahoe1 wrote:Have a look at this. I carry it everywhere I go. Don't go calling your local FS office to bring unnecessary attention to it but instead print it out and carry it with you.

Seems to me the world is wide open. Someone please correct me. Doesn't mean you should go land in front of a bunch of ground loving people enjoying themselves either but I can't help but read this and thinks it's in our favor.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nope--you didn't read far enough in that very Sam section of the FS regs. Here's the kicker:

"When provided by an order, the following are prohibited:

(j) Being publicly nude.

(y) Landing of aircraft, or dropping or picking up any material, supplies, or person by means of an aircraft, including a helicopter."

And, yes, there's a whole bunch of other no nos in between....I left the public nudity thing in just as a reminder.

Point is, as I noted before with some agencies, and the Forest Service is one, each unit (that means National Forest in this case) establishes its own policies on all these things, including landing aircraft.

So, while you cited a case where aircraft landings are excluded, I guarantee you that most Forests have specific regulations which in fact prohibit the landing of aircraft except at airports.

Wave that piece of paper in front of an enforcement type on the wrong Forest (and most in the lower 48 would be that type) and you'll still get a ticket.

As usual, except in Alaska.

Nice try.

MTV

mtv wrote:

As usual, except in Alaska.

MTV

I love this part!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mtv wrote:

aktahoe1 wrote:Have a look at this. I carry it everywhere I go. Don't go calling your local FS office to bring unnecessary attention to it but instead print it out and carry it with you.

Seems to me the world is wide open. Someone please correct me. Doesn't mean you should go land in front of a bunch of ground loving people enjoying themselves either but I can't help but read this and thinks it's in our favor.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nope--you didn't read far enough in that very Sam section of the FS regs. Here's the kicker:

"When provided by an order, the following are prohibited:

(j) Being publicly nude.

(y) Landing of aircraft, or dropping or picking up any material, supplies, or person by means of an aircraft, including a helicopter."

And, yes, there's a whole bunch of other no nos in between....I left the public nudity thing in just as a reminder.

Point is, as I noted before with some agencies, and the Forest Service is one, each unit (that means National Forest in this case) establishes its own policies on all these things, including landing aircraft.

So, while you cited a case where aircraft landings are excluded, I guarantee you that most Forests have specific regulations which in fact prohibit the landing of aircraft except at airports.

Wave that piece of paper in front of an enforcement type on the wrong Forest (and most in the lower 48 would be that type) and you'll still get a ticket.

As usual, except in Alaska.

Nice try.

MTV

The only thing I find on your post is FS 261.16 as it refers to "Wilderness". That's a lot different than the public lands that the FS administer.

The part "when provided by an order" I'm told is commercial use. Though I'm not doubting you and have heard the very same thing your referring to, I just cannot find it. Please paste here the reg your referring to. We cannot find it. I have spent hours upon hours on this stuff searching.

Alaska is different yes, but it's still the USFS. No different. Same regs. The regs I posted that continue to come up say aircraft are exempt the same as over snow vehicles. You see snow mo's everywhere in the winter. Anyone ever get a ticket in a snow machine? I'm also curious of a first hand account of a pilot getting a ticket?

As I said I'm not doubting you Mike I'm just on the continued quest to find the most updated and factual information.

Slight change of topic as rules are continuously changing, Kalifornia now has the recently passed recreational law protecting land owners. That's also a big benefit to us pilots if you get the permission to land on private property.

AKT

Thanks

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here's some information for Montana. Similar requirements (and prohibitions regarding landing fixed wing and rotor wing aircraft) exist in Washington, Idaho, and Oregon. Check the appropriate FAA Sectional in the lower forty-eight states. All of the Sectionals I've seen have similar restrictions if there are any Federal public lands in the areas charted.

=====================
http://www.montanapilots.org/legislation/Legality%20&%20Liability/Legality_of_Off-airport_landings.pdf

THE LEGALITY AND LIABLITY ISSUES OF LANDING ON PUBLIC LAND AND PUBLIC AIRSTRIPS

The Recreational Airstrip Committee has looked into the legality of landing on off-airport locations and also the liability aspect of landing on public airstrips for recreational purposes. The research for both is listed below.

An off-airport landing in Montana on BLM administered land.

LEGALITY OF LANDING ON OFF-AIRPORT LOCATIONS

The following is taken directly from the NOAA Airport/Facility Directory:

AIRCRAFT LANDING RESTRICTIONS

Landing of aircraft at locations other than public use airports may be a violation of Federal or local law. All land and water areas are owned and controlled by private individuals or organizations, states, cities, local governments, or U.S. Government agencies. Except in emergency, prior permission should be obtained before landing at any location that is not a designated public use airport or seaplane base.

Landing of aircraft is prohibited on lands or waters administered by the National park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, and on many areas controlled by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, unless prior authorization is obtained from the respective
agency (It is notable that lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) are not included in the above listing.)

The following is taken from a Sectional Aeronautical Chart. It offers a little more guidance:

REGULATIONS REGARDING FLIGHTS OVER CHARTED NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AREAS, U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AREAS, AND U.S. FOREST SERVICE AREAS

The landing of aircraft is prohibited on lands or waters administered by the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or U.S. Forest Service without authorization from the respective agency.

Exceptions include:
1) when forced to land due to an emergency beyond the control of the operator
2) at officially designated landing sites, or
3) on approved official business of the Federal Government.

All aircraft are requested to maintain a minimum altitude of 2000 feet above the surface of the following: National Parks, Monuments, Seashores, Lakeshores, recreation Areas and Scenic Riverways administered by the National Park Service; National Wildlife Refuges, Big Game Refuges, Game Ranges and Wildlife Ranges administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and Wilderness and Primitive areas administered by the U.S. Forest Service. FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 91-36C, "Visual Flight Rules (VFR) Flight Near Noise Sensitive Areas," defines the surface as: the highest terrain within 2000 feet laterally of the route of flight, or the upper-most rim of a canyon or valley. Federal regulations also prohibit airdrops by parachute or other means of persons, cargo, or objects from aircraft on lands administered by the three agencies without authorization from the respective agency.

Exceptions include:
1) emergencies involving the safety of human life, or
2) threat of serious property loss.


MONTANA STATE LAW CONCERNING LANDING ON PUBLIC ROADS
The following is taken directly from the Montana Code; MCA 67-1-204 (3) Lawfulness of Flight and Landings:

Aircraft landings and takeoffs from public roads in this state are lawful if proper safety precautions, as approved by the governing
jurisdiction of the roads, are taken prior to the landing or takeoff, except as otherwise provided in this section. However, the local governing jurisdiction may not incur liability as a result of an approval under this subsection.

Aktahoe,

My point was and is that you have to contact the specific UNIT for the specific regs on that unit.

You're right-there is no specific national guidance for this in the Forest Service.

Why don't you simply call the office for a local Forest? Maybe they can convince you. Or go land somewhere in a forest and see how that works.

Want an example? Look at the Boundary Waters Canoe Area in northern MN. They have PROHIBITED airspace over the entire unit. Do you see THAT anywhere in the FS national regs?

MTV

mtv wrote:Aktahoe,

My point was and is that you have to contact the specific UNIT for the specific regs on that unit.

You're right-there is no specific national guidance for this in the Forest Service.

Why don't you simply call the office for a local Forest? Maybe they can convince you. Or go land somewhere in a forest and see how that works.

Want an example? Look at the Boundary Waters Canoe Area in northern MN. They have PROHIBITED airspace over the entire unit. Do you see THAT anywhere in the FS national regs?

MTV

So by this as I read it, I can not land on Lake Roosevelt in WA. state which is part of the Columbia river drainage, but is controlled by the PS?
Or I guess I can land on the river on the reservation side of the river but not the PS side of the river??
I know I can use a Ski doo water craft in the river, but I can not land it on the PS side, but am OK on the Res side??
So if I have a sectional and it does not say prohibited to land on the lake, I can still get hooked?
Thanks

That's my point Mike...Boundary waters are "wilderness" and you can look it up to find the answer. Simple. As the poster above lists all "parks", "preserves", National refuges" Wilderness areas" that is a no no without question.

As you say Mike there is no specific guidance, it states in plain English that over snow vehicles, aircraft, etc., are exempt.

I have landed more times than I can count here in Kalifornia, Nevada and Alaska (Ak being the red headed step child that gets away with everything) only to have Ronnie Ranger drive up and ask if we are alright, then proceed to ask what we do with the big tires then add "you guys have a good day".

It's legal but as you say check with your local district. If I do get a ticket I will be contesting the $250 landing fee and showing them the posted national regs for public lands. As you say, there is no specific guidance in the FS. You can't find it anywhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk