This is from a Watergap club member. A few years ago they had trouble
flying on NPS land, and had their launch closed for quite a while.
-Mike Balk
-----Original Message-----
Hi All:
Here's one of my favorite quotes from a final rule that the National Park
Service published in the 1996 edition of the Federal Register: "36 CFR Part
7 is amended as follows: The use of devices designed to carry persons
through the air in powerless flight is allowed. May 29, 1996. George T.
Frampton, Jr., Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Dept of
Interior".
Believe me when I say, this particular quote was not easy for either the
WGHGC and USHGA to get in writing!! But I guess some of you already know
this from your own personal pain & suffering!
Now here's another one of my favorite quotes that the USHGA has published
near the front of its magazine since I started flying. "The USHGA is a
member-controlled sport organization dedicated to the exploration and
promotion of all facts of unpowered ultralight flight".
Also believe me when I say, this particular quote played an important role
for getting the National Park Service to finally put it down in writing.
Now, here's what I'd like y'all to do ASAP. Please go to the website
<http://www.poteau.com/petition.htm> and follow directions for signing a
petition and mailing it pronto to Peter Birren, 502 Shadywood Lane, Elk
Grove IL 60007 (deadline 11/25/05). Get other USHGAers to sign it too if you
can but don't let this hold up sending in your own signed copy. Your
signatures are needed to make the USHGA conduct a special vote to finally
settle a pesky motorized glider issue once and for all.
I'd sure like it to see it settled pronto. Because motorized gliders in the
USHGA won't make it any easier for us to negotiate with agencies like the
National Park Service and the Appalachian Trail Conference to open up more
of their sites to powerless flight. It's already tough enough to do without
motors!!!
Spread the word.
Thanks
Jack E
powerless flight
Moderator: CHGPA BOD
powerless flight
In a message dated 11/11/05 8:11:25 AM, mike@talismanenterprises.net writes:
That is far and away the most compelling and logical argument I have seen on the subject.? Good job Mike.? I urge you all to read his post and follow up.? Our future flying is in our hands.
Dan T
That is far and away the most compelling and logical argument I have seen on the subject.? Good job Mike.? I urge you all to read his post and follow up.? Our future flying is in our hands.
Dan T
-
Flying Lobster
- Posts: 1042
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 4:17 pm
I'm still sitting on the fence on this one, though I'm personally not interested in motorized units I haven't heard enough from the other side.
I'm especially intrigued by the the above cited NPS rule.
I'm not aware of any rule that states that powerless flight is allowed specifically in National Parks. The last I looked at the Federal Register, overflight ("delivery service") of ANY kind of aircaft is prohibited without a specific exemption from the area's superintendent. We've been fighting this one for a very long time, and I think there are maybe 2 or 3 NP's in the whole country that allow foot-launched flight.
Hope I'm wrong--but that's what the gov big whigs have thrown in my face. (and another reason flying in Shenandoah is something of a small miracle which should be maintained forever!).
marc
I'm especially intrigued by the the above cited NPS rule.
I'm not aware of any rule that states that powerless flight is allowed specifically in National Parks. The last I looked at the Federal Register, overflight ("delivery service") of ANY kind of aircaft is prohibited without a specific exemption from the area's superintendent. We've been fighting this one for a very long time, and I think there are maybe 2 or 3 NP's in the whole country that allow foot-launched flight.
Hope I'm wrong--but that's what the gov big whigs have thrown in my face. (and another reason flying in Shenandoah is something of a small miracle which should be maintained forever!).
marc
