Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > Copter & plane overflights at NP's
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
MooseAndSquirrel
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Nov 2002
Posts: 2036 | TRs | Pics
MooseAndSquirrel
Member
PostMon Sep 22, 2003 5:59 pm 
I heard that a tourist copter crashed in the Grand Canyon yesterday, killing all aboard. The authorities have to hike down to the wreckage to recover the bodies, etc. Evidently the copter was transporting folks down to the Colorado River to start a rafting trip. I'd like to know what you'all think in general of these flights in and over our National Parks- I know they've been a contentious subject with a lot of people. I've experienced helicopter overflights at Bryce Canyon NP while I was down amongst the hoodoos (Fairyland Trail, etc.) and I absolutely despised them. A copter hovered for several minutes right above me on two different occasions- granted it was probably hundreds if not a thousand feet above me- but the noise and sight of it really put a damper on what should have been a more peaceful atmosphere. I gave them all I could muster at the time- a one-fingered waving salute. I knew they were tourist helicopters because they park them right outside the park entrance and I recognized the colors & make. When I first saw the copters on the ground while driving into the park, I assumed the feds would only allow them to fly around the perimeter airspace of the park, but not so, they flew and hovered right smack over the center of it! In the Grand Canyon I had heard long ago that some kind of regulations were in the works to limit overflights of tourist planes & copters to the fringes of the Park airspace after numerous complaints of the racket they were causing. You hear about helicopter flights over in Hawaii, like on the Na Pali coast. I bet for a hiker that would be just a swell sight to see and hear while trying to enjoy that magnificent area. Same thing up in Alaska on the glaciers- and in many more pristine areas of the world there is increased visitor traffic, by aircraft, and the increased chances of negative impact on those environments. As you can tell I'm just flat-out opposed to any of these modes used in seeing the natural world. Not that this has anything to do with aircraft overflights, but for godsakes someone is planning a reality-tv "race" on the Antarctic continent to the South Pole! Give it a rest! Ok, I'm done ranting for a spell. dizzy.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
WrongBridge
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Apr 2003
Posts: 186 | TRs | Pics
Location: Pacific Beach, WA
WrongBridge
Member
PostMon Sep 22, 2003 6:12 pm 
I don't with agree with flights based on tourism, but there are exceptions for helicopters flying in NP's. For instance, I work in fisheries and we fly in on the queets river 2 or 3 times a year for fish counts and studies. Now if the park had their way they wouldn't allow this. Fish counts are extremely important information for the livelihood of the pacific northwest. So not all flights in NP's are bad in my opinion. WB

Too much of a good thing is wonderful (May West)
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MooseAndSquirrel
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Nov 2002
Posts: 2036 | TRs | Pics
MooseAndSquirrel
Member
PostMon Sep 22, 2003 6:55 pm 
Yeah, my point was touristy and other non-essential flights.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
WrongBridge
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Apr 2003
Posts: 186 | TRs | Pics
Location: Pacific Beach, WA
WrongBridge
Member
PostMon Sep 22, 2003 8:39 pm 
MooseAndSquirrel, I know that was your point and I wasn't getting on your case. I've just had hikers getting up in my face and yelling at me after being dropped out of a helicopter. One time after being dropped off a couple came up to me and accused me of being a poacher. I thought it odd of them to do so since I had no gun. All in all though I do have to grip about military maneuvers over the Oly's. It seems that the oly's are the playground for low flying jets that are extremely loud. I support our military and respect it with all my heart but man those jets are pretty low sometimes. One time I was fishing on the upper clearwater river which is just on the outside of the Oly's and a jet blew by over the top of the ridge behind me and I almost crapped my shorts. All I want to know is this legal? WB

Too much of a good thing is wonderful (May West)
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
kiliki
Member
Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2003
Posts: 2310 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
kiliki
Member
PostMon Sep 22, 2003 10:37 pm 
I find them very annoying, too, and they don't seem appropriate in (over) national parks. Unfortunately, they are very popular among the American public. I remember the issue of reducing flights in the Grand Canyon was quite contended, since helicopter supporters cast the battle as between elitist environmentalists and the regular joe who isn't physically able to hike down into the canyon. The NPS so ofen gets slammed for being anti-people (not my sentiment) that they end up on the losing side of these debates, it seems.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cle Elum
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker
PostTue Sep 23, 2003 3:18 pm 
emergencies ONLY! TB

"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide." — Abraham Lincoln
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Stefan
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 5085 | TRs | Pics
Stefan
Member
PostTue Sep 23, 2003 3:47 pm 
The USGS uses a helicopter for snowmelt counts. Need to do it to forecast the snowpack for water supply for electricity, fish, and drinking water. That's pretty important in my boat.

Art is an adventure.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
strider
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Aug 2002
Posts: 464 | TRs | Pics
Location: Silverdale
strider
Member
PostTue Sep 23, 2003 7:37 pm 
Wrongbridge, There was a time that I too found those low flying Navy and Air Force jets annoying and intrusive on those occasions when they roared into my wilderness experience. Several years ago I had the chance to meet a Navy pilot who flew A-6's out of Whidbey Island. I had a very interesting discussion with him on this topic. Changed my thoughts on the issue. When those pilots are between the ridgelines, they are definitely not playing around. They are flying very serious training missions. Flying low through rough terrain is an essential skill for combat pilots. Mountain valleys provide protection from radar detection. This in turn increases the chances of successful mission completion (not to mention survival) when the bullets start flying for-real. Realistic training is critical to preparedness and these pilots have to be ready all the time. They never know when the country will call on them to put it all on the line. Unfortunately, many of the places where mountain terrain training flights are possible are the same places we love to hike into. Like it or not, we hikers and all the other backcountry users make up a very small percentage of the overall population. We collectively don't have that much political clout as a result - there's just not enough of us. I learned from the pilot I met that any areas where there are either large population concentrations, or very powerful (read: big money) political presences, are areas where the military is restricted from training flights. I don't know for sure, but I expect there aren't many noisy, low flying warbirds found close to big money resort areas. Anyone ever seen a F-16 buzz Vail or Tahoe? The way I look at this issue now, my sacrifice of a few seconds of solitude helps to increase that pilots' chances of surviving when the chips are down. Seems a fair price for me to pay given what they are risking, and doing, and sacrificing, for all of us. In fact, these pilots get very few opportunities to fly the mountains, not nearly as many as they would like to have. Those training flights are expensive, and dollars for training are always the first thing to go when budgets get tight. Every second between the peaks is high quality, high cost training time because those training missions are scouted, planned, briefed, flown, debriefed, and critiqued just like a wartime mission. Many. many hours of work by a lot of people are invested for every hour of flight time in the mountains, all to help ensure those pilots are the best at what they do. Very serious business. It is also worth remembering the price paid by pilots who have died against the side of a mountain in the occasional training accident. Helos for tourists taking the easy way, now that's another matter entirely. That's the place where I think huge wilderness use fees should be levied. If we can pay 5 bucks a day to park on our own land and walk up a trail our tax dollars paid to build, the helo tourists can pay an extra $50 bucks a seat in taxes for the convenience and the thrill ride, yes? Too bad we're not a large and powerful group who could successfully lobby for such a tax...... Wrongbridge, please don't take my comments as a flame, it's not intended that way at all. I just wanted to share an insight I was given, once upon a time.

strider I've never been lost, but I'm frequently uncertain where my destination might be in relation to where I am at the moment....
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > Copter & plane overflights at NP's
  Happy Birthday noahk!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum