Originally Posted by
Traffic_Is_Er_Was
Why not? It's private property, and they have stipulated the terms of use, and you have ignored them. What do you think all that fine print says on the sign you drive past as you enter a car park? You don't abide by them, and come back to find your car towed away. Boo Hoo.
Traffic,
I earnestly suggest you acquaint yourself with the rules about interfering with aircraft, which are quite different to motor vehicle.
The real issue here is the treatment of what is or should be a public user facility (like a local road) as simple private property. As usual, the US situation is instructive, anywhere federal funding has been provided, no matter how small, or long ago, such an airfield must be open to everybody without discrimination.
The untold story, here, is how the then Minister, John Anderson, was literally conned by his department into changing the terms of all the ALOP airfields, to the very great disadvantage of the aviation users. And it was a con, we managed to stop it the first time around, but the second time it sneaked through, to the the everlasting gratefulness of real estate developers on local councils.
Don'y forget, most of these airfields were built with Commonwealth taxpayers money in the first place, NOT local ratepayers money.
I have also noted, over the years, and with notable honourable exceptions, how hard it is to get local users to band together to defend their local airfield, instead of apathy followed by whinging at the result, how about fighting for your interest. Usually it doesn't take much of a campaign to shift the local council, because ratepayers have about as much faith in the honesty and good intentions of their local Councillors as they do in politicians in general.
Tootle pip!!