Proposed scenic helicopter tours from Wind River Air

Wind River Air owner Tony Chambers submitted the displayed flight routes in his initial June 2018 application to Jackson Hole Airport. But the airport cannot legally restrict where Chambers’ Robinson R-44 helicopter goes after departing the heli-pad, airport attorney Mike Morgan said at a Friday meeting where Chamber's plans were approved.  

Hoback resident Tony Chambers secured paperwork on Friday to run scenic helicopter flights based out of Jackson Hole Airport, propelling forward a business idea that’s been vehemently opposed by the community.

Before a vote, Jackson Hole Airport’s staff rotated reading aloud one public comment after the next for over six hours, and all but a dozen or so of the hundreds of emails scorned allowing commercial air tours.

Nevertheless, after making a couple of tweaks, members of the Jackson Hole Airport board of directors unanimously approved a permit for Chambers’ business, Wind River Air, arguing that they were legally obliged to say yes or risk jeopardizing tens of millions of dollars of Federal Aviation Administration funding.

“Respectfully, I would tell you that every one of the board members probably is in alignment with the comments,” Jerry Blann, airport board president, said to livestream listeners before a vote.

Board member John Eastman said rejecting Wind River Air, and thus defying the FAA, would be irresponsible and could ultimately jeopardize commercial air service into Jackson Hole. His board counterpart, Bob McLaurin, agreed.

“As a fiduciary of the airport, I’m going to vote for this,” McLaurin said. “It’d be easy to vote against it. It’d be a very popular thing to do. My friends have asked me to vote against it; my family’s asked me to vote against it.”

Some stakeholders rejected the board’s bind.

“The FAA is not omnipotent,” National Park Service retiree and airport neighbor Joan Anzelmo said. “They can be challenged for good cause.”

Jackson Town Councilor Jim Stanford also urged insubordination to an agency that pulls a lot of airport purse strings. Just yesterday, the airport board opted to spend $2 million to start engineering work on a $40 million runway overhaul — which will be funded primarily by the FAA.

“Wyoming has a long history of not simply taking federal government mandates and swallowing them without putting up a fight,” Stanford said. “This is one issue where I think the community has your backs.”

Naysayers weren’t all the usual suspects. Opposition was sweeping, with people from all walks of life taking the time to weigh in with personalized emails and letters.

Dozens of airport neighbors lambasted the plans, including residents of some of the wealthiest Jackson Hole neighborhoods. Critical letters filtered in from professional skiers, conservationists, pilots, poets, real estate agents, medical doctors, town councilors, tourists, safari guides, biologists, botanists, acoustic ecologists, small-business owners, wildlife capture specialists, federal land managers, Army veterans and climbing guides. One 8-year-old resident wrote in urging a “no” vote. There were a dozen or so supportive comments as well.

Blann asked Chambers if hearing six-plus hours of public comment made him want to withdraw the proposal. He declined.

“I’d like to be given an opportunity to prove that I can do what I say I can do,” Chambers said.

Chambers has said repeatedly that be believes he can create a helicopter tour business that works for Jackson Hole. Most of the community, judging by their response, don’t think that’s doable.

A number of residents and organizations criticized the airport for advancing the plans amid a global pandemic that prevents in-person participation.

Chambers submitted his plans nearly two years ago. The airport has held a public meeting, appealed to the FAA and held off on taking a vote twice, including last week when a livestream failed.

Still, dozens of commenters criticized the board for making a controversial decision not essential to the airport operation amid the COVID-19 pandemic, an era when in-person participation isn’t permitted. Blann said there was more public interest in Wind River Air’s application than any other issue of his 20 years on the airport board.

Board members made two amendments to Chambers’ agreement. They snipped the contract from three years to one, a decision that means the airport must abridge all similar contracts going forward. They also added language so that Chambers must engage in a voluntary air tour management plan, vetting his flight plans with the National Park Service, Bridger-Teton National Forest, National Elk Refuge, Wyoming Game and Fish Department and the FAA.

Per the terms of his new permit, Chambers could potentially start flights in May — so, next week. He told the board that, because of the pandemic, he intended to hold off until it’s “perfectly safe” and “perfectly allowed.”

Contact Mike Koshmrl at 732-7067 or env@jhnewsandguide.com.

Mike has reported on the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem's wildlife, wildlands and the agencies that manage them since 2012. A native Minnesotan, he arrived in the West to study environmental journalism at the University of Colorado.

(6) comments

Konrad Lau

This is a common situation played out across our fair land with sickening regularity.

Folks build an airport to service a community and everyone is thrilled.

Then, more and more people move into the area. The property closer to the airport (or harbor or highway or manufacturing facility or train station) is cheaper than other "prime" spots.

Folks purchase that cheaper, noisier land anyway and build homes.

Then they begin to complain to their representatives about the noise hoping the once popular operation will be closed down so their property values can go up.

This behavior is the classic meaning of "greed".

Ken Chison

Looks like this will be the only way to see GTNP this year. He may need to expand his tours into Yellowstone as well.

Theresa Lundquist

It makes me so sad that one selfish person can propose something that will have a huge impact on our community. How can you hear so many statements of protest and not withdraw your proposal. You are not a community member Tony Chambers. Shame on you.

Ken Chison

Theresa. There are probably hundreds, if not thousands, of residents that dont care, one way or another. Just because a few hundred, voiced opposition, that doesn't mean that the public is all against it. Tony is a business owner. Welcome him to the community. A community that is dependent on tourism that is now all but gone. He has alot invested in this endeavor. The same ones whining probably use the airport privately or commercially. When I see our locally, elected, flag desecrator/ military impersonator not wanting it, well, I knew I was cheering for Tony.

Jeffrey Walker

Actually, there are probably only a handful of residents who approve. What you fail to account for is the numerous other helicopter businesses that will come into the community, causing more noise and disruption of the peace and quiet of JH than you can imagine. Think beyond this one vendor and whether you really want JH to become home to numerous helicopter tours. I don't think so.

Don Frank

I will not welcome helicopter tours but I do respect our airport board for upholding the rule of law. Councilman Stanford might rethink his position inciting subordination in the same community he is charged to pursue compliance with law makes one question his judgement. Most all of us fly in and out on noisy aircraft for business, pleasure or for caprice. Making a villain out of a fellow citizen for exercising a permitted use is malicious at worst, hypocritical at best and absent integrity. I will expect opponents to no longer patronize air travel. Any one willing to take a nice long walk? I thought not.

Welcome to the discussion.

Please note: Online comments may also run in our print publications.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Please turn off your CAPS LOCK.
No personal attacks. Discuss issues & opinions rather than denigrating someone with an opposing view.
No political attacks. Refrain from using negative slang when identifying political parties.
Be truthful. Don’t knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the “Report” link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with us. We’d love to hear eyewitness accounts or history behind an article.
Use your real name: Anonymous commenting is not allowed.