Six figure fines for overflying west coast sanctuaries

Richard said:
Spend some time outside of CA. Perhaps then you will see how CA is an anomaly. The only thing that keeps me in CA is the ocean. I tried living away from the ocean, no matter how big the lake or how plentiful the stream I must remain in touch with my oceanic roots.

Anyway, there are many beautiful places and wonderful people outside of CA. CA has become so f'd up. (I've lived in CA longer than Kimberly has been alive.)
Click to expand...

I enjoyed my time in Michigan. I understand why people hate CA. I was just giving them crap. I AM FULLY AWARE OF THE TAXES, TRAFFIC JAMS, COPS, SILLY LAWS, RUDE PEOPLE, AND HIPPIES.

It is still my home (SF born and raised) so you can't talk me out of it. I love it here.
 
John221us said:
During the time the law is in effect (Memorial Day to Labor Day) most beaches in california are very occupied, except at night (some exceptions to the North), especially the LA beaches affected by the law. Unless you are looking to plow across a few hundred people laying on towels, I don't think you will be doing any beach landings.
Click to expand...
The beaches in San Francisco are not crowded, except perhaps on weekends. It's usually too cold for sunbathing, though. People run with dogs on the beach and throw frisbees.
 
Clark1961 said:
Yup, the job is in WWW and has nothing to do with flying. Why do you ask? :D
Click to expand...
Haha, but no. :)

I don't think I've absorbed enough knowledge of your industry by osmosis yet anyway...
 
Everskyward said:
Haha, but no. :)

I don't think I've absorbed enough knowledge of your industry by osmosis yet anyway...
Click to expand...

Nothing like OJT to round out your resume! Running an airplane and running a gas field can't be that different...well, err, umm, maybe not. :D
 
Richard said:
Spend some time outside of CA. Perhaps then you will see how CA is an anomaly. The only thing that keeps me in CA is the ocean. I tried living away from the ocean, no matter how big the lake or how plentiful the stream I must remain in touch with my oceanic roots.

Anyway, there are many beautiful places and wonderful people outside of CA. CA has become so f'd up. (I've lived in CA longer than Kimberly has been alive.)
Click to expand...

I never put down any place outside of CA and I have visited some great places. You have written off CA as being f'd up. Let me asked you, have you ever rock climbed in Joshua Tree, climbed up Clouds Rest in Yosemite, seen the sequoia redwoods in Caleveras, boated on Lake Shasta, skied Squaw Valley, gone wine tasting in Napa or driven the coast in Mendocino? California is a lot more than crowded cities and poor tax laws and people will always want to live here. Where in CA did you live, that you can pass such a harsh judgement?
 
Clark1961 said:
Nothing like OJT to round out your resume! Running an airplane and running a gas field can't be that different...well, err, umm, maybe not. :D
Click to expand...
At least I've come a little ways from my first stupid question about NG. "If it's a gas, why hasn't it all leaked out of the ground over millions of years?" :redface:
 
John221us said:
I never put down any place outside of CA and I have visited some great places. You have written off CA as being f'd up. Let me asked you, have you ever rock climbed in Joshua Tree, climbed up Clouds Rest in Yosemite, seen the sequoia redwoods in Caleveras, boated on Lake Shasta, skied Squaw Valley, gone wine tasting in Napa or driven the coast in Mendocino? California is a lot more than crowded cities and poor tax laws and people will always want to live here. Where in CA did you live, that you can pass such a harsh judgement?
Click to expand...
I've done all those things (except skiing at Squaw) and much much more. I've lived in some beautiful places and some real holes.

CA has become so onerous with rules for this taxes for that. It has become decidely unfriendly to business. There are now millions of ignorant persons in the population. Read that as you may but whereas I could say that about certain specific areas in other states, it is true of most every place in CA. THAT is my point.
 
Again, I have spent a lot of time in CA, and really, really like the natural beauty, and all the great things to see, and do. I liked living in San Fran, but I wasn't paying for it, my company was. Norcal is GREAT! However, there is a big difference when someone else is paying the freight. It has been largely an economic decision for me to not move there as companies will give you a cost of living increase which doesn't mean anything, and your standard of living will suffer. Other than cost it was also a 2A issue. I will not live anywhere I can not exercise my 2A rights, and CA is one of the worst in that area. It is a great state though with probably the most variety to offer, but one of the highest cost, and also most restrictive in some ways.
 
Everskyward said:
At least I've come a little ways from my first stupid question about NG. "If it's a gas, why hasn't it all leaked out of the ground over millions of years?" :redface:
Click to expand...

Well, now you've got one leg up on 99% of the world's population since you know the answer to that question...
 
Anthony said:
Again, I have spent a lot of time in CA, and really, really like the natural beauty, and all the great things to see, and do. I liked living in San Fran, but I wasn't paying for it, my company was. Norcal is GREAT! However, there is a big difference when someone else is paying the freight. It has been largely an economic decision for me to not move there as companies will give you a cost of living increase which doesn't mean anything, and your standard of living will suffer. Other than cost it was also a 2A issue. I will not live anywhere I can not exercise my 2A rights, and CA is one of the worst in that area. It is a great state though with probably the most variety to offer, but one of the highest cost, and also most restrictive in some ways.
Click to expand...

Tell us where you live, so we can bash it too. :rolleyes:
 
The FAA sent around a note on this today, linking to this notice.
 
denverpilot said:
A "natural resource violation". :rollseyes:
Click to expand...

That is ONE slippery slope in the way it is worded.:hairraise::(..
Some wingnut could define "a natural resource" as a cockaroach a plane ran over while taxiing in Fla, or a mosquito chopped up by the prop of a plane in Alaska... :dunno::dunno:.. IMHO.
 
Last edited:
N801BH said:
That is ONE slippery slope in the way it is worded.:hairraise::(..
Some wingnut could define "a natural resource" as a cockaroach a plane ran over while taxiing in Fla, or a mosquito chopped up the the prop of a plane in Alaska... :dunno::dunno:.. IMHO.
Click to expand...

That's not the rule itself, they're just clarifying that it's not an FAA regulation you're violating. I believe NOAA's rulemaking process and the associated legal apparatus is similar to the FAA's. That's not entirely comforting, of course, given the deference that administrative law judges give to the agencies, but I don't think you need to worry about mosquitoes.
 
The whole marine sanctuary thing is BS. I would love it if they'd revoke it and I could look out my living room window and see the drilling rigs that could be out there. Lots of oil under Monterey Bay, and it could not only help supply our needs but also bring in lots of well-paying jobs and the trickledown that follows. Might get us away from a tourism-dependent economy.
 
Maybe it's just me, but this feels like an accusation with a presumption of guilt. Then you have to prove that you are innocent.

Kind of backwards, isn't it?
 
bflynn said:
Maybe it's just me, but this feels like an accusation with a presumption of guilt. Then you have to prove that you are innocent.

Kind of backwards, isn't it?
Click to expand...

It is administrative law, none of that 'rights' sillyness applies.:sad:
 
A few weeks back a friend and I flew around our rural area at 500-600 agl, staying well away from buildings. just looking at the crops and the woods and the streams... We did circle once over an airport outside a small village but did not overfly the village...
After we got back to my field and put the plane away and were shooting the bull with the guys, up shows a State Police Sergeant asking if anyone was flying that morning... Everyone looked at him, shrugged, and turned their backs... So, I engaged him in conversation, handed him a coffee and asked why he was asking...
He said he saw an airplane plane flying illegally low...
How low is that, I asked...
Well, it was barely above the trees and that is illegal...
Where was this?
Right over the xxx airport as I was going down the highway and the plane was not more than 70 or 80 feet high, just over the trees (he was 2 miles away looking out over trees closer to him which will make the plane look far lower than it is)...
So how would planes land or take off or even check the windsock if they have to remain way high?
He looked at me like I was a simple child... "It was too low!" he said with finality...
Maybe not, I said... Actually there are FAA regs which govern that and aircraft can travel at 500 feet above the ground as long as they stay 1500 feet sideways from any occupied dwelling or exposed person, I said with a smile... And within the airport traffic area a plane may fly at any safe altitude for maneuvering purposes..
'Not in my patrol zone' he said and went stomping back to his car...

So, this is the kind of thinking that is being promulgated through the local law enforcement community... The attitude is that being there are terrorists that are a threat, anything he does not like is a threat... Probably your only defense is to download your GPS tracks after a flight and save them...
 
Dr. O said:
Maybe not, I said... Actually there are FAA regs which govern that and aircraft can travel at 500 feet above the ground as long as they stay 1500 feet sideways from any occupied dwelling or exposed person, I said with a smile...
Click to expand...

That's a bit garbled. See 14 CFR 91.119 (excerpt):

Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure...
​

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...8&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.3.10.2.4.10&idno=14
 
Dr. O said:
A few weeks back a friend and I flew around our rural area at 500-600 agl, staying well away from buildings. just looking at the crops and the woods and the streams... We did circle once over an airport outside a small village but did not overfly the village...
After we got back to my field and put the plane away and were shooting the bull with the guys, up shows a State Police Sergeant asking if anyone was flying that morning... Everyone looked at him, shrugged, and turned their backs... So, I engaged him in conversation, handed him a coffee and asked why he was asking...
He said he saw an airplane plane flying illegally low...
How low is that, I asked...
Well, it was barely above the trees and that is illegal...
Where was this?
Right over the xxx airport as I was going down the highway and the plane was not more than 70 or 80 feet high, just over the trees (he was 2 miles away looking out over trees closer to him which will make the plane look far lower than it is)...
So how would planes land or take off or even check the windsock if they have to remain way high?
He looked at me like I was a simple child... "It was too low!" he said with finality...
Maybe not, I said... Actually there are FAA regs which govern that and aircraft can travel at 500 feet above the ground as long as they stay 1500 feet sideways from any occupied dwelling or exposed person, I said with a smile... And within the airport traffic area a plane may fly at any safe altitude for maneuvering purposes..
'Not in my patrol zone' he said and went stomping back to his car...

So, this is the kind of thinking that is being promulgated through the local law enforcement community... The attitude is that being there are terrorists that are a threat, anything he does not like is a threat... Probably your only defense is to download your GPS tracks after a flight and save them...
Click to expand...

Holy cow. Though two friends of mine at my airport told me they got 5 calls in less than 10 minutes about a plane flying on the wrong side of the traffic pattern, probably low - it is a rare occurrence, but it happens. Then minutes after that some kind of fighter jet flies low over town too which didn't help the situation. The noise abatement worries them, they tell me it is calls like that which can get an airport shut down.
 
I bet they'd be ok with a bullet train:rolleyes:
 
John221us said:
I never put down any place outside of CA and I have visited some great places. You have written off CA as being f'd up. Let me asked you, have you ever rock climbed in Joshua Tree, climbed up Clouds Rest in Yosemite, seen the sequoia redwoods in Caleveras, boated on Lake Shasta, skied Squaw Valley, gone wine tasting in Napa or driven the coast in Mendocino? California is a lot more than crowded cities and poor tax laws and people will always want to live here. Where in CA did you live, that you can pass such a harsh judgement?
Click to expand...

John, I was in California last summer for 2 weeks, visiting from South Florida. It's a beautiful and diverse place. Like South Florida though, there is a growing number of people/forces that seem to be trying to build a wall between the people that truly love what these respective states have to offer, and the people that live there.

My guess is, some of the criticisms in this thread are coming from people that knew California before it became so regulated and had so many people there that have never been to any of those places you mention. Something also tells me that they can remember a version of your beloved state that you have never experienced - an even better version. In all likelihood, you "both" probably love the same things about CA, but the critics on the site have already seen so much of it slip (or be taken) away. Bottom line" You and the CA critics on this site are all on the same side.

The problem I have with those that seek to protect the environment don't seem to recognize that man is, indeed, a part of that environment, and we have every much the right to interact with it as any other animal.
 
I used to practice slow flight by flying in formation with the cars on a country road. I stopped when I realized that even though I knew I was at 700' agl and 700' from the cars, they didn't.
 
Palmpilot said:
That's a bit garbled. See 14 CFR 91.119 (excerpt):

Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure...
​

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...8&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.3.10.2.4.10&idno=14
Click to expand...

Holy crap!!!! :yikes: I must have busted that one several hundred times!!!

Is there any provision for amnesty??? :D
 
Threefingeredjack said:
Holy crap!!!! :yikes: I must have busted that one several hundred times!!!

Is there any provision for amnesty??? :D
Click to expand...

Were you taking off from or landing on the vessel? :)

Also, if you were flying a helicopter, there is an exception in suparagraph (d).
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
Were you taking off from or landing on the vessel? :)

Also, if you were flying a helicopter, there is an exception in suparagraph (d).
Click to expand...

Sometimes in a helo. We would typically hover at 50 ft. for hoists. It is not uncommon to drop pumps at 200ft. from a C-130 if the winds are feisty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top