The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) recently sent a letter to Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy and Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum requesting assistance to help a pilot recover his airplane after it was seized following an emergency landing on the Red Lake Indian Reservation in northern Minnesota on Oct. 15, 2025.
The letter, sent by AOPA President and CEO Darren Pleasance, states that the pilot, Darrin Smedsmo, made an emergency landing “consistent with established aviation safety procedures and federal regulations… solely to preserve life and property and was necessitated by mechanical failure, not by choice or negligence.”
The aircraft, a Stinson 108, was confiscated by the Red Lake Nation, which “has refused to permit its retrieval by the owner,” citing a 1978 tribal resolution that claims jurisdiction over airspace up to 20,000 feet, and bans overflights of “any airplanes.”
“This assertion raises serious concerns, as regulation of navigable airspace is a matter of exclusive federal authority and administered by the Federal Aviation Administration,” Pleasance wrote. “Moreover, a state highway — though it may traverse tribal land — remains a public right-of-way, and the emergency use of that roadway by an aircraft in distress is a permissible and lawful incident of aviation operations.”
In the letter, Pleasance said the incident raises broader aviation safety concerns and urged both federal departments to work together, and with the tribe, to ensure similar situations do not occur in the future.
“The continued detention of the aircraft not only imposes substantial financial harm on the owner but also sets a troubling precedent that could discourage pilots from making necessary emergency landings, thereby jeopardizing public safety,” Pleasance wrote.
You can read the letter here.
For more information: AOPA.org
P.S. What happens if someone in RLN needs a medevac because of a traffic accident? “Nope, not coming. We’re afraid you’ll seize our helicopter.” Actions have consequences, somebody didn’t think this through.
Red Lake Nation is going to lose this one. (Sorry, guys . . . )
FAA has jurisdiction over all navigable US airspace. Period. Emergency landings are allowed anywhere without penalty. Nobody chooses to have an emergency or chooses where it will occur.
Now – RLN cannot issue a blanket prohibition on overflying. FAA overrides. They CAN issue a request for restricted airspace (TFR) for ceremonies, etc. (Usually granted, but has a start and end date/time.) Low flying is also a no-no, the FAA will enforce this.
Emergency landing on a US highway gets a bit more complex. If it is a US highway, it may (probably does) have an easement though RLN territory. If not, once on the ground, the aircraft is on RLN tribal territory and subject to RLN jurisdiction. If it is moved off the highway and is now on RLN territory, they do have jurisdiction.
In the past, emergency landings on tribal territories have been treated as exactly that – emergencies, no foul, no penalty. If there is damage to any tribal territory, the tribe can move for (and collect) damages, just like if the airplane landed in your back yard and destroyed your pumpkin patch.
Either something is missing from the story (Mr. S really annoyed someone), or RLN got some very bad legal advice, or something else happened that we have not heard about.
Interesting to see how this plays out . . .
Are they claiming “Sovereign Nation” status? If not, they are located in and governed by the laws of the United States.
“Claiming” jurisdiction of airspace up to 20,000’ means nothing. I can ‘claim’ the airspace over my house but it doesn’t mean I own it.
Surely sensible heads will prevail. Someone has a burr up their butt for some other reason, and Mr Smedsmo is paying the price for some Chief Rainwater wannabe.
Was there a published prohibition for overflying that airspace? What was the “mechanical failure” cited in the article?
What POSSIBLE difference would that make??? Common sense has been abandoned here.