SANPARKS to get authority over airspace in CT???

[glimmerman_alpha]

Heard the following which might put the cat amongst the pigeons:

"SANParks have been granted custody over the Marine Protected Areas Airspace - i.e. the airspace over both National Park & Sea areas in Cape Town. This means that all helicopter operations around the Peninsula will be subject to SANPARKS approval. SANPARKS will issue a specific flight path for the Peninsula and only specific operators will be allowed to make use of this flight path after approval from SANPARKS.The process is yet to be finalised"

What next......!

[stressmerchant]

SANPARKS manage the area on behalf of Dept of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). At the moment DEAT are short of funds, and are looking for more "users" to charge fees. My guess is that this "airspace" matter is merely an extension of that policy, and that the main point is to extract a "user fee".

[Gunship]

Good idea if ....

It is handled in a professional way and means.

No extorsions / bribes and the rest of those baddies I personally think it is in the interest of safety (pax and locals) , in the interest of the enviroment and of course our main income , tourists that there must be some sort of " guard" over our beautiful coast.

[SANAE1249]

I would like to put the situation into perspective. A new "Protected Areas 57 of 2003l" replaced the old Parks Act of yonks ago. This happened in April 2005. Following that the new Regulations for the management of National Parks, Marine Protected Areas,Special Nature Reserves and World heritage sites became effective on 1 November 2005.

What this means to GA is the following: Height Restriction of 2500 ft above the highest point in the park/reserve. Before everybody goes ballistic, note the following: There is scope for interpretation in that the manager of that specific park or unit can use discretion in implementing measures towards a workable solution in case of conflicting interests. CT would be a good example in that the law would put them well into the TMA. We al know that ATNS runs that show. The same would apply over ADDO near PE.

We will have to set up a group of representatives from industry within each affected area in the country and work out a solution that would benefit avaition and help SANParks (DEAT)not to have to take out the big stick and ram the law up our noses.

I think everybody agree that if you are on the Otter Trial or on a Wilderness Trial in Kruger, you would like to have the place for yourselve and enjoy hte expierience. Try the Otter in summer and see how many warriors comes batting along the Tsitsikamma coast a day.

I think the ball is in our court how we are going to play this.

Your thoughts?

Here is an extract from the Protected Areas Act:

Use of aircraft in special nature reserve, national park or world heritage site

47. (1) A special nature reserve, national park or world heritage site includes the air space above the reserve, park or site to a level of 2 500 feet above the highest point of the reserve, park or site.
(2) No person may land or take off in an aircraft in a special nature reserve, national park or world heritage site, except—
(a) on or from a landing field designated by the management authority of that special nature reserve, national park or world heritage site; and
(b) with the permission of, and on conditions determined by, the management authority.
(3) No person may fly over a special nature reserve, national park or world heritage site at a level of less than 2 500 feet above its highest point, except as may be necessary for the purpose of subsection (2).
(4) Subsections (2) and (3) do not apply-
(a) in an emergency; or
(b) to a person acting on the instructions of the management authority.
(5) The Minister, acting with the concurrence of the Cabinet member responsible for civil aviation, may prescribe further reasonable restrictions on flying over protected areas.

Start planning

[B Sousa]

It happens all over the world. I fly daily out to the Grand Canyon where airspace is controlled by the National Park system. Obviously the rules are done by the FAA but they are as a result of the Parks input.
If done correctly it will work. "Done Correctly" in Africa can be a major concern..........

[glimmerman_alpha]

Thanks for the posting SANAE. I am aware of the regulation which you posted. The new proposed regulation states that only some operators will be allowed by tender process to make use of this flight path. Any truth in that?

[Goldfish Jack]

With the amount of a/c that fly below 1000ft AGL over built up areas around the Peninsula, one wonders how they are going to police them flying over the National Parks

I think it is going to require a lot of "self-regulation" as SANAE1249 says, but then you will always get one person who ruins it for everyone else..................

You should spend a day at Clifton and see the amount of a/c that flout the rules in the SRA and then one wonders how they are going to "police" the National Parks, but then with the sights on Clifton at the moment, it is no wonder everyone wants to overfly Clifton4 at 50ft.

[B Sousa]

With the amount of a/c that fly below 1000ft AGL over built up areas around the Peninsula, one wonders how they are going to police them flying over the National Parks

I think you should see with the numerous threads on the "Huey, Frelon sagas" that not much will get done besides ruffling of feathers.......

[Gunship]

but then with the sights on Clifton at the moment,

I pressume it is these "sights" you talk about GFJ