Backcountry Pilot • Reed Ranch Closed

Reed Ranch Closed

Discuss the legality of flying the backcountry, FARs, advocacy, and aviation relevant legislation. Registered users only.
11 postsPage 1 of 1

Reed Ranch Closed

I was talking to the guys from Idaho Aviation Association today at the NWAC and they were telling me that the Forest Service has taken over Reed Ranch and have effectively closed it.

It is by permission only and the managing Ranger at Krassel has said he is the person who you would have to get permission from and he does not see that happening.

I really would hate to lose another airport in the back country.

Anyone have any better info I would like to hear it.

TD
TomD offline
User avatar
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: Seattle
Aircraft: Maule M5-235C

For those unfamiliar with Reed Ranch, it's 11 miles west of JC! I.E., it's someplace you would want to visit when you're in the Idaho backcountry! It was a private ranch in the middle of the National Forest. As I understand it, some developers wanted to whack down some nice forest next to a ski area and build condos for rich people. The forest service agreed if the developers would buy the Reed Ranch and do a land swap. So, this airstrip is now your property, and you get to help decide whether or not you want to be able to use it.

There is another thread about reopening Reed Ranch and having the state of Idaho manage it. You have to send in your comments before March 2, 2009.

phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3541

I sent in my comments when chrisg posted the information. Basically, I read the documents to which he had linked, and noted that the state of Idaho was proposing to make a couple of improvements like removing a few trees and adding some windsocks to improve safety. They also noted a few concerns like there is another runway six miles downstream and potential environmental impacts.

I stated in my comments that the Reed Ranch is a longer and safer airstrip than Krassel USFS, the only other airstrip on the south fork, and that the safety improvements of removing trees and adding windsocks would be welcome. I also stated that six miles of separation was more than adequate to ensure safe operations. I also tried to address their environmental concerns by noting that airplanes contribute virtually nothing to erosion because they have no driven wheels and because the runways are fairly flat and level. I also stated that unlike 4x4s and ATVs, airplanes are usually only used to transport you to the site, then generally remain parked while you camp.

There's only a week left! Respond now, before it's too late. It's truly trivial to do, you can email your comments.
kevbert offline
Posts: 948
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:10 am
Location: Idaho

What's the best address to make a comment??

Thanks,
Joe
Coyote Ugly offline
User avatar
Posts: 897
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:51 pm
Location: Middle of Nevada (Middle of Nowhere?)
They used to say there are no old bold pilots, hell, looka here........

Track My Spot

This is an excerpt from the public letter identifying how to submit comments:

Comments on this project may be submitted electronically, through the mail, by fax, or hand
delivered. Comments must be postmarked by the 30th day following publication of the legal
notice in the Idaho Statesman. Electronic comments may be sent to comments-intermtn-payettekrassel@
fs.fed.us. They need to be in message, text, .doc, or .rtf format. Written comments
should be sent to Joe Harper, Krassel District Ranger, 800 West Lakeside Avenue, McCall,
Idaho 83638-3602 or fax 208-634-0433. Hand delivered comments can be taken to the McCall
Ranger District office at 102 West Lake Street, McCall, Idaho during business hours. The
Responsible Official is Suzanne Rainville, Payette National Forest Supervisor


I don't know which is best. Emails are certainly easier to send, but perhaps they are easier to ignore.
kevbert offline
Posts: 948
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:10 am
Location: Idaho

wouldn't it rock to have reed and falconberry both open again...!?
jomac offline
User avatar
Posts: 720
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 10:25 pm
Location: idaho falls, id
jomac

Re: Reed Ranch and message methodology.

Kevbert mentions that possibly emails are easy to ignore.

I do not know if the folks involved with the forest service read or ignore emails. I have met with a couple of the people at the main headquarters in McCall, and they DO NOT care for anyone else getting to play in THEIR sandbox.

I once took a stack of petitions to Sacramento in an attempt to save a couple of small strips in the Hamilton Range, just south east of San Jose, from being eradicated by a "wilderness" bill. The person took my stack of petitions, with hundreds of signatures, and proceeded to educate me in the value of the PERSONAL LETTER. He pointed to a small pile of letters and stated that one of those letters was valued at way more than a petition with a hundred or more "easy" signatures on it.

The air strips in question are "legally" closed, even though the area never did meet any definition of wilderness.
wannabe offline
User avatar
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Palo Alto, Calif.
53 C-170-B+

It is better to be late in this world, than early in the next.

comments-intermtn-payette-krassel(at)fs.fed.us

That's the email address to send your comments about Reed Ranch. Apparently the new deadline is Feb 28th. (I removed the @ sign so that spam bots won't spam the address too much.) Personal letters are great, but I think emails will help too.

John
LowAndSlow offline
User avatar
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 9:27 am
Location: Medford, OR

John,

That's not quite the same as the email address in the original letter. The one you supplied has a hyphen between payette and krassel, the original does not.

I sent my comments in an email to the address that was specified in the original letter. I did not receive any reply, neither a confirmation of receipt, nor a message indicating it was an invalid address.

Which would all seem to indicate that it's better to click print instead of send, stuff it in an envelope, and throw it in the mail.
kevbert offline
Posts: 948
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:10 am
Location: Idaho

Your document was received by the comments-intermtn-payette-krassel
mailbox.
This is an automated message, please do not reply. If a response is
required by the Forest Service, it will be forthcoming.


I got the above confirmation when submitting my comments by email to the address listed in the original document.
blackrock offline
User avatar
Posts: 1576
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: Elko, NV
FindMeSpot URL: http://share.findmespot.com/shared/face ... BFmtASxjeV
Aircraft: Bearhawk

I was told the original email address was bad. I got a confirmation reply when using the one posted above.

John
LowAndSlow offline
User avatar
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 9:27 am
Location: Medford, OR

Reed Ranch address

Yep, the address with hyphens between everything is the right one.

Remember they want the comments attached as a .doc, .txt, or.pdf file they can print out.

If you would like to fax the comments the fax # is 208-634-0433

Mail address:

Joe Harper
Krassel District Ranger
800 West Lakeside Ave.
McCall, ID 83638-3602

USPS will probably not get in there in time if you mail tomorrow.

Cheers,

Tom
TomD offline
User avatar
Posts: 1113
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: Seattle
Aircraft: Maule M5-235C

DISPLAY OPTIONS

11 postsPage 1 of 1

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Latest Features

Latest Knowledge Base