Four backcountry airstrips in Idaho’s Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness known as the “Big Creek Four” have been deemed emergency use only as outlined by a recent legal settlement.
Note the term ‘wilderness character’.
Eco-activist pressure is so bad that Parks Canada wants to close a strip beside the freeway west of Calgary AB because airplanes might disturb wildlife.
Sure, I say, aircraft noise must be worse than heavy truck noise, biggest problem for wildlife is bears and ungulates jumping fences to eat new grass and other plants early in spring but being careless about vehicles.
And for humans - stoopids stopping to gawk at the animals can result in motor vehicle accidents.
So USFS, parks agencies, researchers, … won’t be able to use the strips unless there’s a forest fire in the area?
A grass strip that is not used recreationally won’t be maintained for emergency use.
I’d hate for a pilot experiencing an emergency to die after attempting a landing there.
Aviation is the least impactful way to get to the backcountry. No roads are involved, migrations are not impacted, you fly over the environment, land, enjoy it and fly back.
This is exactly correct. I know many pilots who help maintain back country strips in Idaho and Montana. Pilots are the least impactful on the environment and what exactly is “damaging the wildlife character”?
Sorry…“damaging wilderness character”
I would hope that the NPS also banned surface vehicles with ICE motivators, such as four-wheelers, motorcycles, AWD pickups, etc, or this whole thing is pretty much a sham. Ground vehicles do far more damage to the environment that an airplane does. Airplanes don’t leave trails and ruts in the forest, run over animals, possibly spark fires from poorly maintained exhaust pipes or overheated catalytic converters. Pilots rarely leave their trash behind, throw beer bottles and cans in the brush or use the trees and animals as target practice with the gun they brought along “just for fun”. In fact, if you were to ask park rangers what their biggest problems are for keeping the parks “pristine”, i doubt that pilots and airplanes even make the top ten.
Perhaps we could start a movement to further open the US environment by closing it to “environmentalists”.
New backcountry rules from people who never leave the city.
I completely agree with Jack_Woodhead and slipstream!
‘character of’ is becoming a favourite of eco-activists, used regularly where I live to oppose building housing for humans.
I like to ask who is exhibiting ‘character’ by their opposition to doing something for humans. 