Microlighters

Between 10:15 and 10:45 this morning a microlight flew low over the rhinos at Rietvlei Nature Reserve East of Pretoria (within the Waterkloof CTR). The microlight approached from the North travelling North to South, before turning West and circling overhead the rhinos (well North of the Pinedene Corridor) before leaving to the East. Due to the recent poaching of two rhinos at the reserve, such behaviour is considered suspicious and a possible poaching threat to the rhinos. As such this incident, as well as all future such incidents will be reported and taken as far as possible to prosecute the relevant parties involved.

I understand the height restriction over Rietvlei may be a contentious issue, with Waterkloof ATC giving aircraft clearance to fly below what should be the minimum altitude. However, being restricted airspace all traffic should only fly through the area via the Pinedene Corridor, unless prior permission has been given by the Air Force and Waterkloof ATC.

The aircraft in question has been identified, as it was low enough to clearly read its registration, and Rietvlei staff will do what they can to have the offending pilot prosecuted. The staff at Rietvlei take the poaching threat very seriously. If you do fly near the reserve keep to a straight line flight via the Pinedene Corridor as high as Waterkloof ATC will allow (or at least 1000' AGL when there is no ATC), as the Pinedene Corridor actually takes you over the Southern part of the reserve (the full extent of the reserve is not marked on maps or aeronautical charts) or keep well clear of the reserve.

The Rietvlei staff have requested help in doing what they can to the offending pilot and to prevent such incidents in the future.

What if the Waterkloof ATC asked the pilot to hold...if it is not marked on the maps...

Sounds to me like prosecute is about to become : Persecute
As Nicow said, what if ATC told him to hold.
Ek se maar net........
Jean.

I think the best solution is education. I have learnt lots from these forums and from the people I have met along the way. If it was a junior pilot rather educate before ripping off his wings. Our community needs to look after each other . I understand we don't look good when we make these mistakes. However if it is an experienced pilot that knows the area and was operating in his own capacity (no atc clearance and blatant disregard for rules ) then a good butt kicking is in order.

The Rietvlei staff have requested help in doing what they can to the offending pilot and to prevent such incidents in the future.

Damn... whatever happened to "peer review" and "voluntary compliance" and "cookies & tea"?

The area where the microlight was flying IS marked as a Nature Reserve on aeronautical charts and is clearly North of the Pinedene Corridor. Anyone flying in this area under the Jhb TMA should know the restricted areas and the rules of flying within the Waterkloof CTR. It appears this pilot ignored the rules and did what he pleased while Waterkloof was unmanned over the weekend.

From witness accounts it is clear the pilot spotted the rhinos and deliberately flew over them. This definitely not a case of being asked to hold by Waterkloof ATC. They would not clear them to fly directly over the marked area of Rietvlei Nature Reserve, nor ask them to hold in that area.

Perhaps this is too harsh. However, to educate all pilots, nature reserves like Rietvlei take the poaching problem seriously and any aircraft that disobeys the rules and deliberately flies over rhino will be considered possible poachers and steps will be taken against them, irrespective of their guilt or innocence.

From a pilot's point of view, any pilot flying in an area should know the rules of the area he is flying in. It appears this pilot either did not know the rules (while flying in a restricted area) or ignored them.

I have withheld the registration and type of the offending aircraft. If it will help to educate rather than (as someone has put it) "persecute" the offending pilot then I will reveal the information to the relevant party.

The registration has already been mentioned in our sister forum as an X-Air with registration ZU-XAF

Is there photographic evidence with geotagging?

There is a photograph of the aircraft. However, I do not think it has geotagging and the height of the aircraft cannot be determined from the photo. It is primarily witness accounts, including the person who took the photo.

I suggest an out- of -town pilot unfamiliar with the severity of the situation. Easy for a pilot not familiar with local etiquette - radio calls referring to beacon references instead of visual land marks, airstrips using unconventional frequencies, sensitive chicken farms, game farms not highlighted on maps etc, to get caught in the moment and just overfly again to confirm a first glimpse.

That said, a fixed wing micro light poses no risk at all. Unable to land or properly shoot from and besides a noise factor or spotting, this can be more efficiently done with a drone or simply obtaining information from the staff or numerous building contractors working in or around the complex.

Personally, I think the best way to combat threatened species poaching is to challenge a large indigenous mind-set that harvesting from nature for personal gain is not just an opportunist good luck tough luck scenario. Those raised by laying snares, running down indiscriminate game with hunting dogs to feed communities and watching trophy hunters pay ridiculous amounts to only take selective animal parts don't share the same value system as us anti hunting Kudu biltong vreeting national geographic supporters who can score a years bonus for no visual difference to their lives.

Start by assassinating the dealers, poachers, distributors and challenging traditional philosophy.

Start by assassinating the dealers, poachers, distributors and challenging traditional philosophy.

Cut the head off the serpent - how can I not fault that reasoning?

CommanderKeen wrote:The area where the microlight was flying IS marked as a Nature Reserve on aeronautical charts and is clearly North of the Pinedene Corridor. Anyone flying in this area under the Jhb TMA should know the restricted areas and the rules of flying within the Waterkloof CTR. It appears this pilot ignored the rules and did what he pleased while Waterkloof was unmanned over the weekend.

1) Waterkloof was manned at the time you listed.
2) There are no published eight restrictions for Rietvlei.

While not a particularly good idea, I don't think the pilot was breaking any laws.

I would also like to hear the pilot's account of his flight...

I'm back to the process of peer review or how we do it in the area not to offend others... what is locally accepted to be "neighbourly love and respect" is NOT necessarily promulgated CARS!!!

I think we must get an updated list from all the proclaimed areas from caa-every second guy with game on his plot/farm,thinks its a no fly zone...

Exactly Nico...

http://www.caa.co.za/Flight%20Restricti ... Items.aspx

And an interactive map from DEA here:

http://mapservice.environment.gov.za/par/map.aspx

Although you need to turn off layers for everything but 'National Parks' 'Special Nature Reserves' and 'World Herritage Sites'.

Unfortunately, this is not the complete list, as some Protected Areas are promulgated with additional aviation restrictions (almost impossible to locate/list all of them). And some restrictions exist only in AICs (need to manually search AIC database).