Alaska hunting lodge Pilot

brien23

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,489
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
Private pilot taking people in their aircraft to their hunting lodge that they charge for in Alaska, how is this not for hire or compensation.
 
It's sketchy, but probably hasn't ruffled enough feathers to get the feds hot and bothered enough yet to go out there and dig into it
 
Because the trip cost is based on lodging and guide services. Transportation is not being hired out. The guys that fly that way are typically commercial pilots but part 135 does not apply. The FAA knows all about it so nobody's doing it in secret.
 
If the PP is not being compensated, than I see nothing wrong with it.

As Stewart said, the transportation is not being hired out, so it doesn't matter what they do once they arrive on location.
 
FAA tried to make a case out of it in the early nineties. They have since backed off because the majority of the flying is incidental to the business. Basically all you need to become a "hunting guide" pilot is a PPL, knowledge of the outdoors, and know how to field dress any game.

Here's a good interview of a bush pilot/guide if you're so inclined to listen to it.
 
Broadly falls into the category of 'things you can do in Alaska'. For the rest of the country Administrator vs. William F. Murray III applies and transportation bundled with entertainment is still transportation for hire.
 
Not private pilots unless they're splitting costs. Commercial pilots.
 
azblackbird said:
FAA tried to make a case out of it in the early nineties. They have since backed off because the majority of the flying is incidental to the business. Basically all you need to become a "hunting guide" pilot is a PPL, knowledge of the outdoors, and know how to field dress any game.

Here's a good interview of a bush pilot/guide if you're so inclined to listen to it.
Click to expand...

To actually become a guide takes years and tons of OJT.
 
weilke said:
Broadly falls into the category of 'things you can do in Alaska'. For the rest of the country Administrator vs. William F. Murray III applies and transportation bundled with entertainment is still transportation for hire.
Click to expand...
So the FAA has two sets or rules those for Alaska and those in the lower 48.
 
Stewartb said:
Because the trip cost is based on lodging and guide services. Transportation is not being hired out. The guys that fly that way are typically commercial pilots but part 135 does not apply. The FAA knows all about it so nobody's doing it in secret.
Click to expand...

Maybe...but what about the "common purpose" part of the regulation for PPL's? The guy is basically ferrying people from point A to point B. How is this not part 135?

Also, if it's for business then you definitely need a CPL from what I understand, PPL's can't carry people with them for business-related stuff I thought.
 
Caramon13 said:
Maybe...but what about the "common purpose" part of the regulation for PPL's? The guy is basically ferrying people from point A to point B. How is this not part 135?
Click to expand...
Same way any corporate airplane isn't 135...they're not holding out to the public.
 
brien23 said:
So the FAA has two sets or rules those for Alaska and those in the lower 48.
Click to expand...

The rules are the same, the zeal with which they are applied seems to vary. The NTSB ALJ decision I cited wasn't the first time the FAA got involved in this. There have been other attempts to bundle transportation with lodging services and every time this has come up the FAA has insisted that the transportation has to be done by a part 135 or 121 operator. Now most of those cases didn't deal with 3-4 guys in a 206 but but the legal concepts remain the same.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Same way any corporate airplane isn't 135...they're not holding out to the public.
Click to expand...

Ok, but this guy IS holding out to the public by offering to fly people to the lodge.

Holding Out: A carrier is holding out when they represent themselves as willing to furnish transportation within the limits of its facilities to any person who wants it.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Same way any corporate airplane isn't 135...they're not holding out to the public.
Click to expand...
How is some hunter that saw a add in a hunting magazine and takes a ride with a PPL to a lodge the same as a employee of a corporation on their own jet.
 
MauleSkinner said:
No, he's holding out for lodge space. You can't get on the airplane unless you're a lodge customer.
Click to expand...

When he offered to fly someone to the lodge, that was holding out. Note the description says willing to furnish transportation within the limits of its facilities to any person who wants it.

So, the person already wants to go to the lodge by purchasing space, he's willing, so..how is this not holding out?
 
MauleSkinner said:
No, he's holding out for lodge space. You can't get on the airplane unless you're a lodge customer.
Click to expand...

Still, the service is available to any member of the public that is willing to pay the price. If you sold 'glass of orange juice in the Bahamas' to all comers, the fact that you are also selling a product doesnt negate the fact that you are offering transportation along with it.

A couple of weeks ago we celebrated my wifes birthday on a lunch cruise. It's still a 'for hire' operation in the eyes of USCG despite the fact that food and boat ride are bundled.
 
Caramon13 said:
When he offered to fly someone to the lodge, that was holding out. Note the description says willing to furnish transportation within the limits of its facilities to any person who wants it.

So, the person already wants to go to the lodge by purchasing space, he's willing, so..how is this not holding out?
Click to expand...
Where is that description? I haven't seen it in this thread.
 
weilke said:
A couple of weeks ago we celebrated my wifes birthday on a lunch cruise. It's still a 'for hire' operation in the eyes of USCG despite the fact that food and boat ride are bundled.
Click to expand...
I would imagine that the USCG does not feel the need to parrot FAA regs...they've probably got their own.
 
If the FAA decided to crack down on this, with the next must-pass spending bill there would be a special provision that exempts this operation from 119.1. It's Alaska, and Alaska is for special people.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I would imagine that the USCG does not feel the need to parrot FAA regs...they've probably got their own.
Click to expand...

It's an illustration of the concept, not any claim that both are governed by the same regulation. USCG regs are stricter on some aspects of 'for hire' and more lenient on others.
 
It's Alaska, after all... a large percentage of pilots up there don't have any license, let alone a commercial.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Ah...the description of holding out. I would (and have) argue that he's not holding out for air transportation, he's holding out for lodge business.
Click to expand...

Gotcha, I think a question might be how are people going to get to said lodge? If there's a route to drive there then why offer to fly people? By doing that he's helping out, sure, but he's also effectively providing a transportation alternative/ferry which = holding out.

If you can ONLY get to the lodge via plane, then that's definitely a clear issue too.
 
Alaska has a "by no other means" clause.

I have taken gasoline in 5 gallon cans on scheduled flights. It is allowed because there was no other way to get the gas to its destination.

Dana said:
It's Alaska, after all... a large percentage of pilots up there don't have any license, let alone a commercial.
Click to expand...

While it's true there are people flying on expired medicals, revoked certificates and out of annual airplanes, it is no more percentage wise than in the lower 48.
 
Caramon13 said:
Gotcha, I think a question might be how are people going to get to said lodge? If there's a route to drive there then why offer to fly people? By doing that he's helping out, sure, but he's also effectively providing a transportation alternative/ferry which = holding out.
Click to expand...
But again, it's not to the general public, which is the other factor that defines holding out.

It's just like the corporate airplane that carries customers and/or contractors, but still doesn't fall under Part 135 because it doesn't meet the definition of holding out.
 
MauleSkinner said:
But again, it's not to the general public, which is the other factor that defines holding out.
Click to expand...

An owner of a private lodge taking his private guests doesn't need anything, not even a commercial ticket. If someone offers lodging services to anyone willing to pay a posted fee, they are holding themselves out as a lodging establishment.
 
weilke said:
An owner of a private lodge taking his private guests doesn't need anything, not even a commercial ticket. If someone offers lodging services to anyone willing to pay a posted fee, they are holding themselves out as a lodging establishment.
Click to expand...
Exactly...the FAA only cares about holding out for air transportation. They could care less if you sell fidget spinners or lodge space.
 
weilke said:
An owner of a private lodge taking his private guests doesn't need anything, not even a commercial ticket. If someone offers lodging services to anyone willing to pay a posted fee, they are holding themselves out as a lodging establishment.
Click to expand...

Really? So that's an AK thing then?

I can just plop a cabin in the woods somewhere and then buy a plane and take people there who are paying me money without any of the regulatory requirements a normal commercial operator would need?
 
MauleSkinner said:
Exactly...the FAA only cares about holding out for air transportation. They could care less if you sell fidget spinners or lodge space.
Click to expand...

If you package air transportation with your lodging, they do care (except in AK).

If you sell a bottle of cheap sparkly wine at $800 for a customer to get access to the 'champagne room' , you are still a whore, not a bartender.
 
Caramon13 said:
Really? So that's an AK thing then?

I can just plop a cabin in the woods somewhere and then buy a plane and take people there who are paying me money without any of the regulatory requirements a normal commercial operator would need?
Click to expand...

That at least seems to be the current interpretation applicable for the territory of the AK FSDO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top