Hunters Blundering onto Air Fields

[RatherBeFlying]

ihunterapp.com told two hunters our glider field is crown land. So they shot two deer, drove across a runway - and were subsequently stopped by Fish and Wildlife.

We are the leaseholder. It seems ihunter doesn't check if crown land is under lease, or occupied, or an aerodrome.

If your 'drome is on crown land, don't forget your flak jacket.

Yes, I've sent my concerns to ihunter and the Ministry.

[youhavecontrol]

I have to do low passes to chase ATV drivers off the airstrip we use for training from time to time. One time I had to shut down and kick an old lawn mower part off the runway surface. ..silly rednecks.

[dogone]

You did not HAVE to report the hunters. If they were not interfering with aircraft or acting unsafe just inform them of the situation and move on. Perhaps a hunter will report your supposed low and unsafe flying someday. Far to many folks get law involved when common sense would do.

[confusedalot]

Wouldn't a few perimeter signs around the territory indicate to hunters where they are and what they are dealing with?

[photofly]

It’s an offence under CAR 301.08(i) to discharge a firearm within or into the boundary of an aerodrome without the permission of the aerodrome operator. Unfortunately there’s no penalty associated with the rule, but it’s something you could put on a sign.

[B208]

In the spirit of "What's right, not who's right", I'm with the idea of putting up some signs (assuming there aren't some already). The vast, vast majority of firearms owners and hunters are very safety conscious and mindful of regulations. If they are informed that an area is a no-go zone they will respect it.

[Moose47]

"silly rednecks"

Little stereotyping are we?

[pelmet]

Shoot 'em

[all_ramped_up]

In the spirit of "What's right, not who's right", I'm with the idea of putting up some signs (assuming there aren't some already). The vast, vast majority of firearms owners and hunters are very safety conscious and mindful of regulations. If they are informed that an area is a no-go zone they will respect it.

This.

[Meatservo]

"silly rednecks"

Little stereotyping are we?

Uh-oh. Rednecks have only been an "ethnic group" for ten seconds, and someone is already offended!

[youhavecontrol]

"silly rednecks"

Little stereotyping are we?

As a born and raised rural Albertain, with dust, mud and oil in my blood... yeah. I'll call them what I am. ..not like they'd be embarrassed by that title anyways.

[confusedalot]

Shoot 'em

For any particular reason?

I am not a hunter by the way, and I hate guns.

[Prairie Chicken]

It’s an offence under CAR 301.08(i) to discharge a firearm within or into the boundary of an aerodrome without the permission of the aerodrome operator. Unfortunately there’s no penalty associated with the rule, but it’s something you could put on a sign.

Well, there is a penalty, but it would be an effort to have an investigation initiated & action taken if warranted. In this instance where no harm was actually done, you're right, nothing much would likely happen.

[photofly]

It’s an offence under CAR 301.08(i) to discharge a firearm within or into the boundary of an aerodrome without the permission of the aerodrome operator. Unfortunately there’s no penalty associated with the rule, but it’s something you could put on a sign.

Well, there is a penalty, but it would be an effort to have an investigation initiated & action taken if warranted. In this instance where no harm was actually done, you're right, nothing much would likely happen.

Nope, Not even after an investigation.

301.08 is not listed in Schedule II to subpart 103.08, therefore doesn't quaify as "designated" under section 7.6 of the Aeronautics Act. Therefore sections 7.7 to 8.2 of the Act don't apply and no monetary penalties are possible.

The only actions that TC can take against a transgressor (per Chapter 10 of TC's Aviation Enforcement Policy Manual) is oral counselling and suspension of a Canadian Aviation Document. Unless the hunter or hunters are also pilots (in which case their licences could be suspended) the only thing Transport Canada can do is invite them to an interview, no coffee no biscuits. And if they don't bother to turn up there's nothing further that can be done.

[nine sixteenths]

Cleaning a few deer out of the area isn’t always a bad thing:

https://www.google.ca/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4324293

[photofly]

Cleaning a few deer out of the area isn’t always a bad thing:

https://www.google.ca/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4324293

From that article:

"Sunwest is working with the airstrip operator on ways to make landings safer for wildlife, RCMP say. "

It's nice to see everyone's priorities are arranged in the correct order!

[linecrew]

"silly rednecks"

Little stereotyping are we?

...not like they'd be embarrassed by that title anyways.

I was gonna say, a lot of the rednecks I know proudly wear the title...

[RatherBeFlying]

I have had a very useful dialog with iHunter.

As well as amending data for our field, they will be looking into the larger problem that provincial and state land databases may not show air field data.

At present any other software developer using provincial and state land databases may end up showing air fields as unoccupied public land.

301.08 is not listed in Schedule II to subpart 103.08, therefore doesn't quaify as "designated" under section 7.6 of the Aeronautics Act. Therefore sections 7.7 to 8.2 of the Act don't apply and no monetary penalties are possible.

301.08 is prosecutable under 7.3

Contravention of Part, regulation, etc.

(3) Except as otherwise provided by this Part, every person who contravenes a provision of this Part or any regulation, notice, order, security measure or emergency direction made under this Part is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

[photofly]

301.08 is prosecutable under 7.3

Contravention of Part, regulation, etc.

(3) Except as otherwise provided by this Part, every person who contravenes a provision of this Part or any regulation, notice, order, security measure or emergency direction made under this Part is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Aha. OK. But they'd need to be prosecuted in court first. TC can't just issue a fine.

[Prairie Chicken]

Prosecution is the correct answer. It's also the reason there is almost no enforcement or action taken for 301--it would have to be very serious or a recurring offence for charges to be laid by TC or police.