FAA Is Not The Sole Flight Regulatory Authority

Okay. You're planning a sightseeing flight off the coast, and you
think you've checked "all available information" per Title 14 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) section 91.103. But are the FARs
the only place a PIC needs to check for federal flight regulations?

Apparently other government agencies in addition to FAA rule the skies
also:


http://www.faa.gov/news/aviation_new...mayjun2008.pdf

Although people like to go whale watching, pilots need to maintain
the proper minimum altitude over whales to avoid disturbing them.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission photo

Whale Watching

Even if you live near the ocean, it’s a safe
bet that you will never have to worry about
whales invading your airplane. Whales, on the
other hand, sometimes have to worry about having
their space invaded—illegally—by aerial sightseers
in general aviation aircraft. Since the beginning
of the year, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) has documented several
private aircraft off the coasts of Georgia and Florida
circling in close proximity to right whales, which are
a critically endangered species in the baleen whale
family.

Here’s the rule. We pilots aren’t keen on having
wildlife invade our space, and the law requires
us to return the favor when it comes to operating
in the vicinity of certain animals. You are probably
already aware of the requirement to fly at least 2,000
feet above ground level (AGL) over wildlife preserves
depicted on sectional aeronautical charts. What you may
not know, though, is that if you fly near any place
that right whales are known to live, the law (Title 50
Code of Federal Regulations section 224.103(c)) prohibits
you from approaching within 1,500 feet (500
yards) of these creatures, unless you have a permit
from the National Marine Fisheries Service. If you
do not have such authorization, the law requires that
you establish a course away from any right whale and
immediately depart the area at a constant airspeed,
unless compliance would create an “imminent and
serious threat” to a person, vessel, or aircraft.

So keep a sharp lookout, and do your part to
“fly friendly” wherever you happen to be.


Susan Parson is a special assistant in the FAA’s General Aviation
and Commercial Division. She holds an ATP certificate with an
airplane multiengine land rating and commercial privileges for
airplane single-engine land. She also holds advanced and
instrument ground instructor certificates and a flight instructor
certificate with ratings for airplane single and multiengine
land and instrument airplane.


Who knew?

Apparently the author of the above article that appeared on page 28 of
FAAAviation News May/June 2008, Ms. Susan Parson, overlooked Title 50
Code of Federal Regulations section 224.103(c))(iv):

(iv) Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section do not apply to
an aircraft unless the aircraft is conducting whale watch
activities.

Is there a formal definition of "whale watch" activities?


Here's the federal regulation:

---------------------------------------------------------
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...0.13.3&idno=50
e-CFR Data is current as of May 1, 2008

Title 50: Wildlife and Fisheries
PART 224—ENDANGERED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES

§ 224.103 Special prohibitions for endangered marine mammals.
(a) Approaching humpback whales in Hawaii. Except as provided in part
222, subpart C, of this chapter (General Permit Procedures), it is
unlawful for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States to commit, to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit,
or to cause to be committed, within 200 nautical miles (370.4 km) of
the Islands of Hawaii, any of the following acts with respect to
humpback whales ( Megaptera novaeangliae ):

(1) Operate any aircraft within 1,000 feet (300 m) of any humpback
whale;

(2) Approach, by any means, within 100 yard (90 m) of any humpback
whale;

(3) Cause a vessel or other object to approach within 100 yd (90 m) of
a humpback whale; or

(4) Disrupt the normal behavior or prior activity of a whale by any
other act or omission. A disruption of normal behavior may be
manifested by, among other actions on the part of the whale, a rapid
change in direction or speed; escape tactics such as prolonged diving,
underwater course changes, underwater exhalation, or evasive swimming
patterns; interruptions of breeding, nursing, or resting activities,
attempts by a whale to shield a calf from a vessel or human observer
by tail swishing or by other protective movement; or the abandonment
of a previously frequented area.

(b) Approaching humpback whales in Alaska —(1) Prohibitions. Except as
provided under paragraph (b)(2) of this section, it is unlawful for
any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to commit,
to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit, or to cause to be
committed, within 200 nautical miles (370.4 km) of Alaska, or within
inland waters of the state, any of the acts in paragraphs (b)(1)(i)
through (b)(1)(iii) of this section with respect to humpback whales (
Megaptera novaeangliae ):

(i) Approach, by any means, including by interception (i.e., placing a
vessel in the path of an oncoming humpback whale so that the whale
surfaces within 100 yards (91.4 m) of the vessel), within 100 yards
(91.4 m) of any humpback whale;

(ii) Cause a vessel or other object to approach within 100 yards (91.4
m) of a humpback whale; or

(iii) Disrupt the normal behavior or prior activity of a whale by any
other act or omission, as described in paragraph (a)(4) of this
section.

(2) Exceptions. The following exceptions apply to this paragraph (b),
but any person who claims the applicability of an exception has the
burden of proving that the exception applies:

(i) Paragraph (b)(1) of this section does not apply if an approach is
authorized by the National Marine Fisheries Service through a permit
issued under part 222, subpart C, of this chapter (General Permit
Procedures) or through a similar authorization.

(ii) Paragraph (b)(1) of this section does not apply to the extent
that a vessel is restricted in her ability to maneuver and, because of
the restriction, cannot comply with paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

(iii) Paragraph (b)(1) of this section does not apply to commercial
fishing vessels lawfully engaged in actively setting, retrieving or
closely tending commercial fishing gear. For purposes of this
paragraph (b), commercial fishing means taking or harvesting fish or
fishery resources to sell, barter, or trade. Commercial fishing does
not include commercial passenger fishing operations (i.e. charter
operations or sport fishing activities).

(iv) Paragraph (b)(1) of this section does not apply to state, local,
or Federal government vessels operating in the course of official
duty.

(v) Paragraph (b)(1) of this section does not affect the rights of
Alaska Natives under 16 U.S.C. 1539(e).

(vi) These regulations shall not take precedence over any more
restrictive conflicting Federal regulation pertaining to humpback
whales, including the regulations at 36 CFR 13.65 that pertain
specifically to the waters of Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve.

(3) General measures. Notwithstanding the prohibitions and exceptions
in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section, to avoid collisions with
humpback whales, vessels must operate at a slow, safe speed when near
a humpback whale. “Safe speed” has the same meaning as the term is
defined in 33 U.S.C. 2006 and the International Regulations for
Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (see 33 U.S.C. 1602), with respect
to avoiding collisions with humpback whales.

(c) Approaching right whales —(1) Prohibitions. Except as provided
under paragraph (c)(3) of this section, it is unlawful for any person
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to commit, attempt to
commit, to solicit another to commit, or cause to be committed any of
the following acts:

(i) Approach (including by interception) within 500 yards (460 m) of a
right whale by vessel, aircraft, or any other means;

(ii) Fail to undertake required right whale avoidance measures
specified under paragraph (c)(2) of this section.

(2) Right whale avoidance measures. Except as provided under paragraph
(c)(3) of this section, the following avoidance measures must be taken
if within 500 yards (460 m) of a right whale:

(i) If underway, a vessel must steer a course away from the right
whale and immediately leave the area at a slow safe speed.

(ii) An aircraft must take a course away from the right whale and
immediately leave the area at a constant airspeed.

(3) Exceptions. The following exceptions apply to this section, but
any person who claims the applicability of an exception has the burden
of proving that the exception applies:

(i) Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section do not apply if a
right whale approach is authorized by the National Marine Fisheries
Service through a permit issued under part 222, subpart C, of this
chapter (General Permit Procedures) or through a similar
authorization.

(ii) Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section do not apply where
compliance would create an imminent and serious threat to a person,
vessel, or aircraft.

(iii) Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section do not apply when
approaching to investigate a right whale entanglement or injury, or to
assist in the disentanglement or rescue of a right whale, provided
that permission is received from the National Marine Fisheries Service
or designee prior to the approach.

(iv) Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section do not apply to an
aircraft unless the aircraft is conducting whale watch activities.

(v) Paragraph (c)(2) of this section does not apply to the extent that
a vessel is restricted in her ability to maneuver and, because of the
restriction, cannot comply with paragraph (c)(2) of this section.

(d) Special prohibitions relating to endangered Steller sea lion
protection. The regulatory provisions set forth in part 223 of this
chapter, which govern threatened Steller sea lions, shall also apply
to the western population of Steller sea lions, which consists of all
Steller sea lions from breeding colonies located west of 144° W. long.

[64 FR 14066, Mar. 23, 1999, as amended at 66 FR 29509, May 31, 2001;
69 FR 69537, Nov. 30, 2004; 70 FR 1832, Jan. 11, 2005]
---------------------------------------------------------



So, where are right whales found?

http://whale.wheelock.edu/whalenet-stuff/reportsRW_NE/
NOAA, and NMFS
Right Whale Sighting Advisory System (SAS)
and
The Division of Marine Fisheries
of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
REPORTS & DATA: 2008




http://whale.wheelock.edu/whalenet-stuff/reports/
New England Aquarium
EARLY WARNING SYSTEM
Surveys For Right Whales in the Florida/Georgia area.
Maps, Data, and Reports



http://www.googlesyndicatedsearch.co...e.wheelock.edu

On May 6, 5:27*am, Larry Dighera wrote:

§ 224.103 * Special prohibitions for endangered marine mammals.
(a) Approaching humpback whales in Hawaii. Except as provided in part
222, subpart C, of this chapter (General Permit Procedures), it is
unlawful for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States to commit, to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit,
or to cause to be committed, within 200 nautical miles (370.4 km) of
the Islands of Hawaii, any of the following acts with respect to
humpback whales ( Megaptera novaeangliae ):

(1) Operate any aircraft within 1,000 feet (300 m) of any humpback
whale;


I wonder, is there evidence that a whale is aware of a flying
aircraft?

Hmmm.

Cheers

"WingFlaps" wrote in message
...
On May 6, 5:27 am, Larry Dighera wrote:

§ 224.103 Special prohibitions for endangered marine mammals.
(a) Approaching humpback whales in Hawaii. Except as provided in part
222, subpart C, of this chapter (General Permit Procedures), it is
unlawful for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States to commit, to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit,
or to cause to be committed, within 200 nautical miles (370.4 km) of
the Islands of Hawaii, any of the following acts with respect to
humpback whales ( Megaptera novaeangliae ):

(1) Operate any aircraft within 1,000 feet (300 m) of any humpback
whale;


I wonder, is there evidence that a whale is aware of a flying
aircraft?

Hmmm.

Cheers

Or that whales give a damn, even if they are aware.

Peter Dohm wrote:
"WingFlaps" wrote in message
...
On May 6, 5:27 am, Larry Dighera wrote:

§ 224.103 Special prohibitions for endangered marine mammals.
(a) Approaching humpback whales in Hawaii. Except as provided in part
222, subpart C, of this chapter (General Permit Procedures), it is
unlawful for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States to commit, to attempt to commit, to solicit another to commit,
or to cause to be committed, within 200 nautical miles (370.4 km) of
the Islands of Hawaii, any of the following acts with respect to
humpback whales ( Megaptera novaeangliae ):

(1) Operate any aircraft within 1,000 feet (300 m) of any humpback
whale;

I wonder, is there evidence that a whale is aware of a flying
aircraft?

Hmmm.

Cheers

Or that whales give a damn, even if they are aware.






Who knows, they might enjoy seeing airplanes fly by.

"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in message
m...
...

Who knows, they might enjoy seeing airplanes fly by.

My dog seems to.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

On May 6, 10:11*am, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk At Wow Way
D0t C0m wrote:
"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in messagenews:KqidncTlxPWQ8oLVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@super news.com...
...



Who knows, they might enjoy seeing airplanes fly by.

My dog seems to.

Smart dog.

Cheers

"WingFlaps" wrote in message
...
On May 6, 10:11 am, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk At Wow Way
D0t C0m wrote:
"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in
messagenews:KqidncTlxPWQ8oLVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@super news.com...
...



Who knows, they might enjoy seeing airplanes fly by.

My dog seems to.

Smart dog.


Smarter than some "people" who post here...

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

On Mon, 5 May 2008 19:01:31 -0400, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea
Hawk At Wow Way D0t C0m wrote in
:

"WingFlaps" wrote in message
...
On May 6, 10:11 am, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk At Wow Way
D0t C0m wrote:
"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in
messagenews:KqidncTlxPWQ8oLVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@super news.com...
...



Who knows, they might enjoy seeing airplanes fly by.

My dog seems to.

Smart dog.


Smarter than some "people" who post here...

And smarter than some government agencies:

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/14976065/detail.html
Court Orders Navy To Protect Whales From Sonar
NRDC Says They Are Satisfied With Ruling

POSTED: 9:47 pm PST January 3, 2008
UPDATED: 6:14 am PST January 4, 2008
LOS ANGELES -- A U.S. District Court on Thursday ordered the Navy
to adopt a series of measures to lessen the impact of sonar on
whales and other marine life during exercises off Southern
California.

The preliminary injunction said the Navy must:
Create a 12-nautical-mile no-sonar zone along the coast.
Have trained lookouts watch for marine mammals starting 60 minutes
before and then during exercises.
Shut down sonar when mammals are spotted within 2,200 yards.

District Court Judge Florence-Marie Cooper also barred the Navy
from employing sonar in the Catalina Basin, an area that is home
to what she called "a high density of marine mammals." This area
extends from Santa Catalina Island south to San Clemente Island.

"We are aware of the court's decision and we are reviewing it,"
said Lt. Cmdr. Cindy Moore, a Navy spokeswoman.

The Natural Resources Defense Council filed the lawsuit to force
the Navy to lessen the harm of its sonar exercises.

Joel Reynolds, director of the NRDC's Marine Mammal Protection
Project, said he was pleased with the decision.

"Although the Court's order recognizes the Navy's need to train
with sonar for our national defense, this is the most significant
environmental mitigation that a federal court has ever ordered the
U.S. Navy to adopt in its training with mid-frequency sonar,"
Reynolds said.

The council's lawsuit alleges the Navy's sonar interrupts foraging
and mating of whales and other marine mammals and can cause them
to beach themselves. In 2000, naval sonar contributed to 16 whales
and two dolphins being beached in the Bahamas, according to a
federal study.

According to Thursday's court order, the Navy has used or planned
to use MFA sonar during 14 large-scale exercises off the Southern
California coast between February 2007 and January of 2009.

The Navy's assessment was that approximately 170,000 marine
mammals would be exposed to sonar in these exercises, with more
than 450 instances of permanent injury to some whales, the court
order said. ...



http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/14976065/detail.html
Blue Whale Requiem
Mystery reigns as sonar tests pit military training against
beloved Southland pods

By JUDITH LEWIS
Wednesday, September 26, 2007 - 5:00 pm
None of the whales seemed to have been killed by sonar. Scientists
who examined two of them found no blood in their ear canals, nor
hemorrhaging in their brains, as was the case with seven whales
that became stranded and died in the Bahamas after Navy midrange
sonar testing in 2000. The blue whales did not come ashore in
groups, like 37 pilot whales that beached in North Carolina after
midrange sonar testing there. Nor did anyone find gas bubbles in
the blue whales’ tissue, which could indicate they had surfaced
too quickly out of fear, then died from the bends. All the blue
whales died with broken bones and blunt-force injuries, meaning
they died because they were hit by ships.




http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...,5472074.story
She noted that the Navy's own study concluded that upcoming
exercises off Southern California "will cause widespread harm to
nearly 30 species of marine mammals, including five species of
endangered whales and may cause permanent injury and death."

Because scientists have chronicled panicked responses from marine
mammals as far as 40 kilometers away, Cooper said the 2,200-yard
shutdown requirement "represents a minimal imposition of the
Navy's training exercises" while preventing the harshest
sonar-related consequences.

From the posted article, the main point against this injunction seems
to be that no whales have died from sonar. But why is death considered
the only proof of harm?

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
From the posted article, the main point against this injunction seems
to be that no whales have died from sonar. But why is death considered
the only proof of harm?

Its kind of hard to get sworn testimony of lost sleep, harassment, etc.
from a whale.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.