Arrested for "air trespass"

This will be an interesting case when it enters the courts.
 
If I was in the area, and a pilot, I'd be happy to plan a big group fly-over.
 
I can't pretend to have all the details, nor do I have indepth knowledge of our laws as they relate to indian tribes.

I do know they lack SAMs and AA batteries.
 
bqmassey said:
If I was in the area, and a pilot, I'd be happy to plan a big group fly-over.
Click to expand...

This is the kind of stuff I love. Reminds me of the sit-ins in high school protesting the war.

Hell no, we won't go! hell no, we won't go! Only this time we fly right over the reservation about 500 strong. Go ahead, make my day. :mad3:
 
flyersfan31 said:
Yes, but don't forget that tribes are sovereign nations. Not sure how that changes thing. Do we need a flight treaty????
Click to expand...

Comm planes overfly reservations(sovereign nations) thousands of times each day. I don't see the natives up in arms about SW and United violating the space. Just one lone GA pilot.
 
Since I've been in Page, AZ, I've heard a few stories of this tribe's heavy handed techniques. They are, uh, tolerated....
 
If I read this right, they arrested him outside the res... aside from everyting else, is this SOP, or even legal?
 
flyersfan31 said:
Yes, but don't forget that tribes are sovereign nations. Not sure how that changes thing. Do we need a flight treaty????
Click to expand...

If there is a sacred areas couldn't they get the airspace designated as Restricted or a Sensitive area like Devils Tower?

It looks like the sensitive designation merely requires that it's interesting and interesting to fly over which upset the RVers and hikers visiting the interesting area, as in the Grand Canyon.
 
This irritates me. How about we start asking them to pay taxes like the rest of us.

Too soon?
 
Sounds to me like they've commited an act of war. Time to call out the cavalry again. And I'm only half kidding in this case.
 
I am wondering if this is truly an 'airspace issue'. There may be more details which contributed to this whole scenario.

My roomate spends the summers guiding throughout the GC, and has offered me a few insights. He began by telling me about the "permit" structure of everything which happens on tribal lands. This is their primary means of generating revenue, by tapping the tourist market for just about everything.

In the original article, it claimed he was arrested, whereas in the later articles he was not arrested, but only cited for trespass. One of the articles claimed he did not have the "permit" to fly over the tribal lands. Whether the tribe has a right to charge for airspace use is what will likely be the primary question if that is the main charge of the citation.

Another one of the "permits" that is required on reservation land is to take photographs. As this incident seems to revolve around the camera, I wonder if this is one of the charges. If he was observed taking pictures from the air, then the reservation police may leave tribal lands to issue the citation, but probably got a little overzealous by towing his camper.

Apparently his camper was returned relatively quickly. Supposedly there are many people just "squatting" on both Federal and Reservation lands in that area. They park their RV or camper, and live off doing the bare minimums.

This guy is French and if he fits within this profile, might be an illegal, or an overstayer. One article claims he has been guiding bus tours in the area for some time. It would be interesting to know if he had the appropriate permits to do so.

It will be interesting to see how this turns out....
 
colomtnflyer said:
I am wondering if this is truly an 'airspace issue'. There may be more details which contributed to this whole scenario.

My roomate spends the summers guiding throughout the GC, and has offered me a few insights. He began by telling me about the "permit" structure of everything which happens on tribal lands. This is their primary means of generating revenue, by tapping the tourist market for just about everything.

In the original article, it claimed he was arrested, whereas in the later articles he was not arrested, but only cited for trespass. One of the articles claimed he did not have the "permit" to fly over the tribal lands. Whether the tribe has a right to charge for airspace use is what will likely be the primary question if that is the main charge of the citation.

Another one of the "permits" that is required on reservation land is to take photographs. As this incident seems to revolve around the camera, I wonder if this is one of the charges. If he was observed taking pictures from the air, then the reservation police may leave tribal lands to issue the citation, but probably got a little overzealous by towing his camper.

Apparently his camper was returned relatively quickly. Supposedly there are many people just "squatting" on both Federal and Reservation lands in that area. They park their RV or camper, and live off doing the bare minimums.

This guy is French and if he fits within this profile, might be an illegal, or an overstayer. One article claims he has been guiding bus tours in the area for some time. It would be interesting to know if he had the appropriate permits to do so.

It will be interesting to see how this turns out....
Click to expand...
Do you actually have the temerity to suggest that there may be more to the story than originally reported by the professional, reputable, infallible media?:nono::rofl:
 
gprellwitz said:
Do you actually have the temerity to suggest that there may be more to the story than originally reported by the professional, reputable, infallible media?:nono::rofl:
Click to expand...

Number one rule of the media "Never let the truth ever get in the way of a good story."
 
colomtnflyer said:
In the original article, it claimed he was arrested, whereas in the later articles he was not arrested, but only cited for trespass.
Click to expand...

IIRC, he was detained, and while you can be detained without being arrested for a limited time it seem to me that being detained is considerably more serious than being "cited".

One of the articles claimed he did not have the "permit" to fly over the tribal lands. Whether the tribe has a right to charge for airspace use is what will likely be the primary question if that is the main charge of the citation.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me that the tribe believes that they have the right to regulate aircraft in the air within their lateral boundaries. If that's the case and this pilot is tried in tribal courts he would likely be convicted regardless of the legality of such proceedings per US law.

Another one of the "permits" that is required on reservation land is to take photographs. As this incident seems to revolve around the camera, I wonder if this is one of the charges. If he was observed taking pictures from the air, then the reservation police may leave tribal lands to issue the citation, but probably got a little overzealous by towing his camper.
Click to expand...

I don't see any difference between any tribal control of flight over their lands and taking pictures from the air over their lands.

Apparently his camper was returned relatively quickly. Supposedly there are many people just "squatting" on both Federal and Reservation lands in that area. They park their RV or camper, and live off doing the bare minimums.
Click to expand...

I thought that the tribe was still holding his camper (or was that the aircraft) and I don't see what relationship exists between his camper being parked outside the reservation and squatters parked inside.

This guy is French and if he fits within this profile, might be an illegal, or an overstayer. One article claims he has been guiding bus tours in the area for some time. It would be interesting to know if he had the appropriate permits to do so.
Click to expand...

All that seems rather irrelevant to the issues surrounding his arrest or "citing". There might be something of interest to the US immigration folks but AFaIK they haven't delegated that authority to this tribe.
 
In my experience, a French national in northern Az or southern Ut can usually be relied upon to be completely responsible for their own misfortunes. Their capacity for misadventure seemed limitless.

Btw the article does not mention that the res police had anything to do with his motorhome...just that he was coincidentally made homeless at about the same time. A condition that occurs relatively often when you are found to be guerilla camping on Blm land.
 
If you read the linked articles in the original article, there are many conflicting statements about this incident. Given these various descriptions of the situation, a clear picture is almost impossible to derive.

Wahtor Skeer (Lance)
I was merely presenting a few of the scenarios which my roomate had brought to my attention. This included the idea that maybe the citation was not entirely for an airspace violation, but also the lack of a "photography permit", as is required by some of the tribes whose reservations border the GC. These would have been two separate "permits" (read 2 x "permit fees"). Lack of either may have instigated the citation.

According to the article(s), as the RV/camper was returned to the person in question by the tribal police after an initial hearing, I made the assumption that it had been the tribal police who impounded it. As most of the roads in that area do not have clear markings delineating when you are entering or departing tribal lands, is it possible he was actually parked inside the boundaries of the reservation, rather than outside as the pilot thought??

According to the article(s), his camera and the "lawn mower sized engine" used to power his aircraft are still being held as evidence.

Apparently the squatters I referred to (after further discussion with my roomate for clarification) are both on and off the tribal lands. It also seems a very high percentage of these squatters are European, and in many cases, not in the country on a current legal visa. You are correct that this would be a matter for the INS/ICE, and not a tribal concern. But this incident may bring unwanted attention to this person, should he fall into the afore mentioned category.
 
Don't forget the guy is French. With that one aspect alone alone you just know that there is going to be conflict coming your way. What is it with the Grand Canyon. It draws the the goofiest group of European bastards. It was like that years ago when I was flying 135 in and out of the canyon airports on a daily basis. It seemed that all the really weird folks that you would run into would be from Europe.
 
mikea said:
If there is a sacred areas couldn't they get the airspace designated as Restricted or a Sensitive area like Devils Tower?

It looks like the sensitive designation merely requires that it's interesting and interesting to fly over which upset the RVers and hikers visiting the interesting area, as in the Grand Canyon.
Click to expand...

And like the Sensitive area with the note 'World Heritage Area' over Taos pueblo. Don't know if it helps since it's voluntary.
 
The poop is this revolves around aerial photography. Specifically aerial shots of the skyway owned and operated by that tribe. Everything is a commercial opportunity with them.

I have some pics I took in which the tribe would be very interested.
 
They just need to sit down and work this out. The tribal sheriff, the casino owner and the french guy. If the french guy just needs to bring some Jack Daniels and some shiny beads. Look at the deals those Frenchies pulled off when the sold us that useless swampland in the South. They are obviously good negotiators.
 
Richard said:
The poop is this revolves around aerial photography. Specifically aerial shots of the skyway owned and operated by that tribe. Everything is a commercial opportunity with them.

I have some pics I took in which the tribe would be very interested.
Click to expand...

Screw the tribes. It is time we null-and-voided those outdated treaties and say "Welcome to the U.S. citizen, you are now like the rest of us".

I cannot stand collective guilt and the crap it leads too.
 
tdager said:
Screw the tribes. It is time we null-and-voided those outdated treaties and say "Welcome to the U.S. citizen, you are now like the rest of us".
Click to expand...

That was done with the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Which raises the question, how can an American Indian tribe be a "sovereign nation"?
 
roncachamp said:
That was done with the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Which raises the question, how can an American Indian tribe be a "sovereign nation"?
Click to expand...

Because the BIA was established 100 years earlier and they were advocates of the Native Americans. The charge of the office was to 'administer lands held in trust' for Native Americans. That gave them standing to declare those lands sacred tribal lands, and finally sacred was changed to sovereign without too much backsplatter from the Sec of Interior at the time. Now, we're in the mess we're in, and we're going to have to break another long standing treaty to fix the mess.

Hyphenated-Americanism. Great concept.

Doc: American citizen.
 
With the Indian tribes, it's always about money. ALWAYS. So there must be some perceived financial offense here....
 
Time to ask them for all the financial aid, and other support to be returned in full, or to be paid for at time of service.

These crackpots are just grandstanding to see if they can get their own bail out!

Write them down for a few billion, will you King O'bailouts?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top