Narrative:

We were on a routine training flight for commercial maneuvers at an altitude of no less than 700-1200' AGL (an altitude in accordance with far 91.79 for an uncongested area) practicing eights on an around pylons. Approximately 10 NM southeast of bob sikes airport is a flat area of a field and wooded area divided by railroad tracks with 2 small towers making this area ideal for these maneuvers. After approximately 30 mins, eglin approach advised that in our maneuvering area was a small petting zoo and that the owner had called and complained that we had overflown the zoo at a low altitude which spooked some of his animals, causing them to inflict minor injury upon themselves. (In the 10 months and 950 hours of instructions in this area, I have never heard of, been told of, or until recently never seen a zoo in this area.) upon landing, I called ATC and found that this type of incident has happened several times in the past. The zoo itself is a wooded area located in the middle of another wooded area, making it practically impossible to see from the air unless one would have been previously told of the location. I believe a noise sensitive area such as this should be displayed on a sectional aeronautical chart as a wildlife area, or made known to ATC so that maybe noise abatement procedures can be implemented before another incident such as this occurs again in the future. Additionally, if an area such as this (the zoo) were to be classified as an open air assembly in which case higher AGL altitude would be required, a pilot would have no way of knowing this since a small wooded area in the middle of a larger wooded area tends to blend together, making it nearly impossible to see from the air. I firmly believe that these areas should be displayed on a chart so that pilots are able to tell of the locations. While the zoo's facs may be substandard to allow the animals to be so easily injured, if future incidents such as this continue to happen, the next time the animals may injure innocent people, as well. These areas need to be on charts to be avoided. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter states that area in question is ese of cew, north of restr area 2914A. Reporter does flight instruction out of vps and cew. Tries to avoid area now that he knows where it is. He has also passed the information onto the flying club at vps. Nothing on FBO bulletin boards about noise sensitive area. Reporter said he heard that the petting zoo owner also had problems with military helicopter's flying low over the area. Analyst suggested he might talk to the FBO's an airport management about staying away from area. Might work as a good neighbor policy.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: INSTRUCTOR AND STUDENT ON TRAINING FLT PAY UNINTENDED VISIT TO PETTING ZOO--ANIMALS COMPLAIN.

Narrative: WE WERE ON A ROUTINE TRNING FLT FOR COMMERCIAL MANEUVERS AT AN ALT OF NO LESS THAN 700-1200' AGL (AN ALT IN ACCORDANCE WITH FAR 91.79 FOR AN UNCONGESTED AREA) PRACTICING EIGHTS ON AN AROUND PYLONS. APPROX 10 NM SE OF BOB SIKES ARPT IS A FLAT AREA OF A FIELD AND WOODED AREA DIVIDED BY RAILROAD TRACKS WITH 2 SMALL TWRS MAKING THIS AREA IDEAL FOR THESE MANEUVERS. AFTER APPROX 30 MINS, EGLIN APCH ADVISED THAT IN OUR MANEUVERING AREA WAS A SMALL PETTING ZOO AND THAT THE OWNER HAD CALLED AND COMPLAINED THAT WE HAD OVERFLOWN THE ZOO AT A LOW ALT WHICH SPOOKED SOME OF HIS ANIMALS, CAUSING THEM TO INFLICT MINOR INJURY UPON THEMSELVES. (IN THE 10 MONTHS AND 950 HRS OF INSTRUCTIONS IN THIS AREA, I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF, BEEN TOLD OF, OR UNTIL RECENTLY NEVER SEEN A ZOO IN THIS AREA.) UPON LNDG, I CALLED ATC AND FOUND THAT THIS TYPE OF INCIDENT HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES IN THE PAST. THE ZOO ITSELF IS A WOODED AREA LOCATED IN THE MIDDLE OF ANOTHER WOODED AREA, MAKING IT PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE FROM THE AIR UNLESS ONE WOULD HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY TOLD OF THE LOCATION. I BELIEVE A NOISE SENSITIVE AREA SUCH AS THIS SHOULD BE DISPLAYED ON A SECTIONAL AERONAUTICAL CHART AS A WILDLIFE AREA, OR MADE KNOWN TO ATC SO THAT MAYBE NOISE ABATEMENT PROCS CAN BE IMPLEMENTED BEFORE ANOTHER INCIDENT SUCH AS THIS OCCURS AGAIN IN THE FUTURE. ADDITIONALLY, IF AN AREA SUCH AS THIS (THE ZOO) WERE TO BE CLASSIFIED AS AN OPEN AIR ASSEMBLY IN WHICH CASE HIGHER AGL ALT WOULD BE REQUIRED, A PLT WOULD HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THIS SINCE A SMALL WOODED AREA IN THE MIDDLE OF A LARGER WOODED AREA TENDS TO BLEND TOGETHER, MAKING IT NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE FROM THE AIR. I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT THESE AREAS SHOULD BE DISPLAYED ON A CHART SO THAT PLTS ARE ABLE TO TELL OF THE LOCATIONS. WHILE THE ZOO'S FACS MAY BE SUBSTANDARD TO ALLOW THE ANIMALS TO BE SO EASILY INJURED, IF FUTURE INCIDENTS SUCH AS THIS CONTINUE TO HAPPEN, THE NEXT TIME THE ANIMALS MAY INJURE INNOCENT PEOPLE, AS WELL. THESE AREAS NEED TO BE ON CHARTS TO BE AVOIDED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR STATES THAT AREA IN QUESTION IS ESE OF CEW, N OF RESTR AREA 2914A. RPTR DOES FLT INSTRUCTION OUT OF VPS AND CEW. TRIES TO AVOID AREA NOW THAT HE KNOWS WHERE IT IS. HE HAS ALSO PASSED THE INFO ONTO THE FLYING CLUB AT VPS. NOTHING ON FBO BULLETIN BOARDS ABOUT NOISE SENSITIVE AREA. RPTR SAID HE HEARD THAT THE PETTING ZOO OWNER ALSO HAD PROBS WITH MIL HELI'S FLYING LOW OVER THE AREA. ANALYST SUGGESTED HE MIGHT TALK TO THE FBO'S AN ARPT MGMNT ABOUT STAYING AWAY FROM AREA. MIGHT WORK AS A GOOD NEIGHBOR POLICY.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.