Four wilderness groups filed a lawsuit against the Payette National Forest in Central Idaho on June 20 over the decision to maintain four areas for hobby pilots to use for unlawful aircraft landings. The Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness was established in 1980 and aircraft were forbidden from landing within the area but the Big Creek Four have grown increasingly popular amongst hobby pilots and backcountry flyers, frequently performing touch-and-go landings and disturbing hikers and wildlife.
Wilderness Watch, Great Old Broads for Wilderness, Friends of the Bitterroot and Friends of the Clearwater filed a suit against the Payette National Forest, a U.S. Forest Service and agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The suit was filed on June 20, claiming the U.S. Forest Service unlawfully permitted, promoted and facilitated maintenance for the private aircraft landings within the Big Creek watershed of the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness.
The Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness covers over 2.3 million acres, making it the largest contiguous federally managed Wilderness in the U.S. outside of Alaska, according to a press release from one of the Plaintiffs, Wilderness Watch. The Wilderness provides a habitat for a large variety of wildlife species which could be disturbed by aircraft frequently flying low over and landing within the secluded Wilderness.
The Central Idaho Wilderness Act designated the River of No Return Wilderness in 1980 and with it, grandfathered in five airstrips already in public use for access to remote areas in the Wilderness. The four landing strips are not included in the grandfathered locations and are in an area of the Wilderness near drainage, hikers, backpackers and river rafters. When the Wilderness was established in 1980, documents showed the airstrips were abandoned and unmaintained, not being used for public access. In 1982, it was agreed that the four abandoned airstrips would return to a natural state and the only lawful airstrips would remain.
Dewey-Moore landing area, photographed by Wilderness Watch in 2022
The four illegal airstrips, called Simonds, Vines, Mile Hi and Dewey Moore, have been called the Big Creek Four. The four sites have become increasingly popular and the lawsuit states this has disturbed wildlife increased the human impact in the Wilderness and interrupted the undeveloped nature in the Wilderness. None of the aircraft frequenting the Big Four meet the rigid criteria for the special provision that allows minimal aircraft access. The suit claims the Forest Service has encouraged and promoted the unlawful landings, including a directive issued by the Regional Forester which adopted a policy to allow the public to use the Big Creek Four without restrictions.
The Forest Service has continued to maintain the Big Four landings for public use, despite the agreement in 1982 that the four locations would return to a natural state, the airstrips have been maintained beyond the conditions from the 1980s and is in direct conflict with the wilderness management plan. The Plaintiffs are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief that the Forest Service’s authorization of landings and promotion for the use, development and maintenance of the Big Four is unlawful.
The four Plaintiffs are a mix of conservation, public interest and grassroots advocacy groups. The members of these groups have a longstanding interest in the preservation of the wilderness, including the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness. The Defendants include Linda Jackson, the Forest Supervisor for the Payette National Forest. Defendant Mary Farnsworth is the Regional Forester for the Intermountain region at the U.S. Forest Service, holding authority over the Payette National Forest and Big Creek Four airstrips. Defendant U.S. Forest Service is an administrative agency within the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
The Frank Church-River and No Return Wilderness is home to a variety of recreational pursuits like hiking, camping, backpacking, skiing, boating, hunting, fishing and snowshoeing. The Wilderness is an undeveloped and remote part of Idaho, perfect for a quiet nature-filled getaway. The staff and supporters in the Big Creek area stress the impact the sound of low-flying aircraft will have on the natural quiet in the area. The suit claims the flyers not only violate the law but cause direct injury to the conservation, education, wildlife preservation, aesthetic and recreational interests in the Wilderness.
Under the Wilderness Act of 1964, deferral land management agencies are in charge of preserving the wilderness character of the designated land. The Wilderness is required to be “managed so as to preserve its natural conditions” so it will appear as nature intends without the imprint of man left behind. A crucial part of preserving natural Wilderness is reducing the human impact. The wilderness, where the earth and its “community of life are untrammeled by man,” as the suit defines, is protected from much of the human impact. Cars, motorboats, structures and aircraft landings are usually prohibited by the Wilderness Act. Only a few slight exceptions exist, like in cases of emergency involving the health and safety of people in the area.
Excerpt from the 2009 Management Plan, prohibiting aircraft
The Big Creek Four are not included in the grandfathered airstrips from the 80s, nor are they included on any revisional plans between 1988 and 2003. Landing at any airstrip other than the public grandfathered locations, like the formerly abandoned Big Four, are prohibited and the land is designated to return to its natural state and not continue operating as a popular landing site. There are lawful airstrips on private and public land within the Wilderness boundary, many publicly accessible to pilots. The Forest Service manages eight of these airstrips and there are five legal airstrips in the Big Creek drainage. The Big Creek Four are not included in this grouping.
Some of the lawful airstrips provide access to otherwise inaccessible regions in the Wilderness and the designation of airstrips has changed since the 1980 declaration. Since the 70s, even before the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness was established, some of the airstrips have been converted from public to private and others were deemed unsafe and shut down. The Big Four have been categorized as unsafe in the past and not fit for operations. Landing at these airstrips is regarded as trespassing and a matter for law enforcement.
#Collaboration across Forest Service Regions and Forest boundaries allows employees to work together on airstrip maintenance projects in the Frank Church-River of No Return & Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. 📸Moose Creek and Fish Lake Airstrips in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. pic.twitter.com/wxEkLpr7pt
— Salmon-Challis NF (@salmonchallisnf) October 3, 2020
The continual maintenance of the airstrips beyond the 1980 conditions has been called unlawful. The Plaintiffs request that the Court declare the Forest Service’s maintenance actions in 2022 and prior a violation of the Wilderness Act, CIWA, NFMA and/or NEPA, and are an abuse of discretion and not in accordance with the law. The Plaintiffs want all maintenance and restorative plans for the Big Four to be eliminated. The request is also that the Forest Services will communicate to the public that the airstrips are prohibited except for emergency landings and violators will face the law.
The use of aircraft in and around nature preserves and national parks is facing more backlash than ever. Some national parks are reducing or eliminating air tours to reduce noise, safety and environmental concerns. The use of the Big Four has been unlawful since the Wilderness was established and aviators will have to find one of the many grandfathered-in landing strips when flying in and around the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness.
Contact
Name: Haley Davoren
, Digital Content Manager
Company: GlobalAir.com
Website: https://globalair.com
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 502-456-3934
©2023 GlobalAir.com, Haley Davoren. All rights reserved.
Recent Comments