Does anyone know if the airstrips located at the mouth of Big Flat Creek on the Lost Coast are on public or private land? Are they in service? I flew over these years ago, and would absolutely love to drop in and camp a day or two.

North Strip GPS coordinates: 40.132252, -124.182540

We've talked about this strip before here. Apparently the pot farmers will chase you off if you use it, or worse. Too bad I'd love to land and check it out also.

Is that a pot farm there at the strip? I wonder if they are territorial about the strip on the other side of the creek?

What about the gravel bars between Pretolia and the mouth of the Matole River.
I brought it up a couple years ago but nobody responded.
I've driven it and it looks doable to me.
Need somebody in a Mooney to go check it out

237

I think if we bring some pot smokers we will be good. right?

Mss's F and P got that area designated Wilderness area maybe to keep out the unwashed masses, besides alot of that coast are now under the bird protection political schemes.
This is American land, its not for the public use. Just stay bottled up in your cities please. Grrr.

SkyTruck wrote:What about the gravel bars between Pretolia and the mouth of the Matole River.
I brought it up a couple years ago but nobody responded.
I've driven it and it looks doable to me.
Need somebody in a Mooney to go check it out

237

Those bars look big and uniform (small rocks?)

I would go check those out with you sometime Skytruck. I wonder if the fishing is any good there?

Nice looking bars on the Klamath as well. Is it legal too land below the high water mark down there in California?

I've had a fantasy the last couple years of flying my old stomping grounds of Big Sur, where I used to live in the early 70's. But I know better, I'd get in big trouble if I treated it like Idaho, plus there's the damn fog....I could deal with the pot farmers. I never forgot hearing actor Clint Eastwood, in some otherwise lame ass interview, talking about the deep personal peace he feels when he solo flew his helicopter down the coast to Hollywood from the Carmel area. Wow....how cool is that?

Two years ago, a buddy and I landed at Little River, outside of Mendecino. We asked about camping on the field. The answer from the ass managing the airport was 'we'll have you thrown in jail if you try that here!'. So not much desire to go back there. Kalifornia rarely fails to live up to my low expectations..

Scolopax wrote:

SkyTruck wrote:What about the gravel bars between Pretolia and the mouth of the Matole River.
I brought it up a couple years ago but nobody responded.
I've driven it and it looks doable to me.
Need somebody in a Mooney to go check it out

237

Those bars look big and uniform (small rocks?)

I would go check those out with you sometime Skytruck. I wonder if the fishing is any good there?

Nice looking bars on the Klamath as well. Is it legal too land below the high water mark down there in California?

The rocks are small and the fishing in the past was good. Needs a good storm for the runoff to blow open the mouth. Drought years are tough on the smaller rivers down here.
Not sure what the rules are down here about landing below high water line.
Being California, I'm sure there are plenty
I'd be game to look it over before the Winter Storms set in.

237

Hi Y’all,

I looked into this last summer and hiked to the strips to find out more.

Both strips at Big Flat are on private property and under the watch of a year-round caretaker. Not owned by dope growers but rather a high-dollar SF attorney, which is probably more dangerous. They are X’ed, and given the demeanor of the caretaker drop-ins are not especially welcome.

The surrounding non-private land is a BLM National Conservation Area, and one the BLM is exceptionally proud of. There are a hand-full of places where it’s occasionally possible to land on the beach proper, but you wouldn’t be able to camp due to the tides. Even at very low tide the preferable landing sites are above the high tide line. All of it is super soft and would require bush wheels.

I don’t know what the laws are regarding landing in a National Conservation Area combined with a marine mammal and bird sanctuary, but aircraft operations would not go unnoticed. The coast guard is very active in that area as is Fish and Game (abalone poaching) and law enforcement (dope) and there are a lot of fishing boats plying the coast. Additionally, the Lost Coast is a very popular backpacking destination with a few dozen people walking it at any given time.

When I was there a big footed super cub came in and did a landing in the dunes, but he didn’t stay long, and he had small numbers. There were backpackers where he landed and they seemed to think it was pretty neat, but many wouldn’t.

On the plus side, a person can land at Shelter Cove and then spend a week or ten days walking up to the Punta Gorda Lighthouse and back down to Shelter Cove and see country much nicer than the airstrips at Big Flat.

My brother in law has known the landowners for many years and occasionally gets to fly in with them. Not dope growers, but folks that value their privacy and are wary of their liability. And they do own it. It does look like a fine little strip. Perhaps some day things will change..

I met the owner of the place at Montague, CA apt (1O5). He fly's a straight tail 182 with a Horton STOL. Various gov agencies have been trying to steel the place for the past several years. He said that if he were not an attorney and had to pay one to protect him from nasty government agency's they would have won decades ago.

He does not like to have folks stop by for liability reasons and also if he opened it up to everybody on this forum, it would get so much use that the agencies would launch a new attack. Also he said that even he could not wright a contract that would protect him from litigation if somebody got hurt.

A few years before I met him, the agencies surveyed the property lines and found that his fence was a few feet over on their property. They charged him with trespassing. Environmental government is truly the enemy of private property.

Tim

qmdv wrote:I met the owner of the place at Montague, CA apt (1O5). He fly's a straight tail 182 with a Horton STOL. Various gov agencies have been trying to steel the place for the past several years. He said that if he were not an attorney and had to pay one to protect him from nasty government agency's they would have won decades ago.

He does not like to have folks stop by for liability reasons and also if he opened it up to everybody on this forum, it would get so much use that the agencies would launch a new attack. Also he said that even he could not wright a contract that would protect him from litigation if somebody got hurt.

A few years before I met him, the agencies surveyed the property lines and found that his fence was a few feet over on their property. They charged him with trespassing. Environmental government is truly the enemy of private property.

Tim

Wasn't their a bill that passed that protects land owners from being sued by people that are using the land for recreational activities?

robw56 wrote:

qmdv wrote:I met the owner of the place at Montague, CA apt (1O5). He fly's a straight tail 182 with a Horton STOL. Various gov agencies have been trying to steel the place for the past several years. He said that if he were not an attorney and had to pay one to protect him from nasty government agency's they would have won decades ago.

He does not like to have folks stop by for liability reasons and also if he opened it up to everybody on this forum, it would get so much use that the agencies would launch a new attack. Also he said that even he could not wright a contract that would protect him from litigation if somebody got hurt.

A few years before I met him, the agencies surveyed the property lines and found that his fence was a few feet over on their property. They charged him with trespassing. Environmental government is truly the enemy of private property.

Tim

Wasn't their a bill that passed that protects land owners from being sued by people that are using the land for recreational activities?

No. Nothing will prevent somebody from suing me. The law may be on my side and I may win in court after outrageous legal fees and having had my life pulled into the turmoil that we call our legal system. It could take years for me to prevail. There are a lot of folks that I would like to invite to land at my place and I am sure that if they totaled a plane they would not come after me but I am not sure about the insurance company that forked over the money. Or the widow if a person that died.

It is stupid to seek legal advice, pay good money and then ignore it. The owner of that strip north of Shelter Cove just wants to not have anymore drama about it than necessary.

Tim

qmdv wrote:

robw56 wrote:

qmdv wrote:I met the owner of the place at Montague, CA apt (1O5). He fly's a straight tail 182 with a Horton STOL. Various gov agencies have been trying to steel the place for the past several years. He said that if he were not an attorney and had to pay one to protect him from nasty government agency's they would have won decades ago.

He does not like to have folks stop by for liability reasons and also if he opened it up to everybody on this forum, it would get so much use that the agencies would launch a new attack. Also he said that even he could not wright a contract that would protect him from litigation if somebody got hurt.

A few years before I met him, the agencies surveyed the property lines and found that his fence was a few feet over on their property. They charged him with trespassing. Environmental government is truly the enemy of private property.

Tim

Wasn't their a bill that passed that protects land owners from being sued by people that are using the land for recreational activities?

No. Nothing will prevent somebody from suing me. The law may be on my side and I may win in court after outrageous legal fees and having had my life pulled into the turmoil that we call our legal system. It could take years for me to prevail. There are a lot of folks that I would like to invite to land at my place and I am sure that if they totaled a plane they would not come after me but I am not sure about the insurance company that forked over the money. Or the widow if a person that died.

It is stupid to seek legal advice, pay good money and then ignore it. The owner of that strip north of Shelter Cove just wants to not have anymore drama about it than necessary.

Tim

I understand that Tim. The "legal" system, insurance companies and cash sniffing attorneys have really capitalized on unfortunate circumstances and crashed the party for those of us who accept responsibility for our own actions.

The attitude is much more favorable here in Oregon than in California, where I know of no less than six private strips less than 50 miles from my home airport that I can fly in to at my own risk, two or three without ever having had a word with the owner. I sure hope that nobody screws this situation up for us in this state.

It looks like a magnificent place that the guy has near Shelter Cove. Wish he was inclined to share it despite fears of being consumed by societies parasites.

Scolopax wrote:


I understand that Tim. The "legal" system, insurance companies and cash sniffing attorneys have really capitalized on unfortunate circumstances and crashed the party for those of us who accept responsibility for our own actions.

The attitude is much more favorable here in Oregon than in California, where I know of no less than six private strips less than 50 miles from my home airport that I can fly in to at my own risk, two or three without ever having had a word with the owner. I sure hope that nobody screws this situation up for us in this state.

It looks like a magnificent place that the guy has near Shelter Cove. Wish he was inclined to share it despite fears of being consumed by societies parasites.

Problem with sharing it is that as use goes up then he draws more attention from bureaucracies. I am sure a low profile is what he wants. Tim

I flew the coast from Pt. Reyes Station to Brookings looking for landing places on beaches and river mouths last spring. I found about ten comfortable sites for a Cub and landed about five for fun. There are many more landable places that get technical. There are only a few beach sites where I thought I could get my plane high enough from the tide to be able to confidently spend the night. Fog is a whole other issue.

I had my daughter with me. We were having lunch on the sand jetty south of Eureka. I thought it was good because it is pretty far from highway access. But here comes the BLM ranger almost getting stuck plowing up the beach. I think having good looking girl with me saved the day. It all turned out fine. He said he suspected the low flying plane involved drugs. Later he admitted law enforcement up there has pretty much given up on weed.

The ranger told me to land below the "wrack line". This term as he told me is the mean high tide line. How anyone could determine that line is beyond me. He said just land below the high tide line. That is below washed up debris.

I get more stealth with each experience. Beach law is nebulous. Mike

I noticed on the satellite view that both of these strips have an "R" next to them, which on a sectional would mean "restricted, or private". That's a bummer!

I looked up both these strips on OnX. The strip on the northern side of the creek is partially on private land while the one on the southern side of the creek is next to a smaller private parcel but is 100% on BLM land. In the OnX satellite photo you can see a plane on the south one but not sure when the photo was taken. I’m sure the landowners are not keen on anyone using these strips (I would be the same) but from what I can tell it should be legal to land on the southern strip.