NIMBYs Put CA Airport On Hold | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-12.09.24

Airborne-NextGen-12.03.24

Airborne-Unlimited-12.04.24

Airborne Flt Training-12.05.24

Airborne-Unlimited-12.06.24

Fri, May 23, 2003

NIMBYs Put CA Airport On Hold

They Prefer Making People Drive

A popular fallacy, often employed by NIMBYs and self-styled "environmentalists," is to skew every possible number in the worst-possible direction, and to look at only one side of any issue -- their side.

So it is with those who are doing their best to interfere with the work at Mammoth Lakes (CA). They claim that the FAA and airport supporters didn't do enough environmental impact work before the project began; and now thy have had their judge put the project on ice, in hopes of delaying construction until the weather again prohibits it.

The funding, roughly $28 million, is still available. FAA spokesman Paul Turk explained, "It does not kill the funding. It basically is on hold while we discover what is going to happen."

The airport is to be expanded to accommodate larger aircraft, including regional jets.

If the enviro-tyrants prevail, the $2.28 million the town and airport have already spent on the project would simply be wasted; it would not have to be returned to the FAA. However, an additional $16 million+ that has been set aside in the town's coffers, would have to go back to D.C.

The NIMBYs note that, in the name of "environmental impact," they prefer the throngs of skiers and sightseers to drive the 250 miles or so from Los Angeles, rather than allow them fast, efficient transport in jets. They claim that jet service would bring "hundreds of thousands" of additional tourists to the area -- and that, apparently, none of those would be people who opted to take the jet instead of making the long drive, one or two or three at a time, in their cars. Airlines, some of which have already tried -- and abandoned -- commercial service to the airport, are wondering how they'll get those "hundreds of thousands" of additional fares...

According to a recent LA Times article, it seems the local folk would like the airport improvements; the NIMBYs seem to be the ones living in the polluted LA Basin, where their example is so well-documented.

FMI: www.mammothweb.com/transportation.html

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (12.06.24): Desired Track

Desired Track The planned or intended track between two waypoints. It is measured in degrees from either magnetic or true north. The instantaneous angle may change from point to po>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (12.06.24)

“Witnesses have spotted the cluster of what look to be drones and a possible fixed-wing aircraft.” (The statement added that there are similar reports from both public >[...]

Airborne 12.06.24: NJ Drone TFR, Isaacman For NASA Admin, MORE Boeing Woes

Also: Gogo Owns Satcom Direct Now, Airbus Cuts Jobs, A319 Firefighters, CAP Balloon Challenge The FAA has confirmed it issued two Temporary Flight Restrictions (TFRs) in New Jersey>[...]

Airborne 12.02.24: Electra FG EIS, Prez Osprey Problems, Starship Wants 25

Also: EAA Ray Foundation, MagniX Records, Ruko U11MINI Drone, RCAF PC-21s Elektra Solar recently put the first aircraft from its Elektra Trainer Fixed-Gear (FG) family into service>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (12.07.24): Ultralight Vehicle

Ultralight Vehicle A single-occupant aeronautical vehicle operated for sport or recreational purposes which does not require FAA registration, an airworthiness certificate, or pilo>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC