The AOPA said on Friday that it sent a second letter to federal officials on Thursday regarding an aircraft seizure dispute involving a pilot whose airplane has remained impounded since an emergency landing last year on the Red Lake Nation reservation in Minnesota.
The letter, which was addressed to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy and Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, follows an earlier letter AOPA sent in December concerning the Oct. 15, 2025, aircraft seizure involving pilot Darrin Smedsmo and his Stinson 108. Smedsmo was flying from Roseau to Bemidji, Minnesota, when an engine failure forced him to land on State Highway 89 near the western edge of Lower Red Lake.
In the letter, AOPA Senior Vice President of Government Affairs and Advocacy Jim Coon said the aircraft has remained impounded for months following the landing and raised questions about how emergency landings are treated under federal aviation law.
“The current situation involving Red Lake Nation raises significant concern within the general aviation community,” Coon wrote. “If an emergency landing made in the interest of safety can be treated as trespassing and result in confiscation of an aircraft and substantial penalties, it creates uncertainty for pilots who may be forced by circumstances beyond their control to land wherever safety requires.”
The association also reiterated that federal regulations give the pilot in command authority to take necessary action during an in-flight emergency and that the regulation of navigable airspace is administered by the Federal Aviation Administration.
Smedsmo recently said he declined a proposed settlement related to the Red Lake aircraft seizure case.
“Well, I finally, finally, received a proposed settlement, and it was—it wasn’t acceptable. It wasn’t even a place to start with,” Smedsmo told PBS Lakeland News.
The settlement proposal, reportedly worth about $7,000, included a towing fee and a $5,000 donation to the Red Lake Nation Boys & Girls Club in exchange for the aircraft’s release.
In the letter to federal officials, Coon also wrote that “the continued impoundment of an aircraft following a legitimate emergency landing raises serious questions about how federal aviation law and safety protections are being applied in this situation.”
I am not aware of any FAA regulation granting exceptions to trespassing laws during an off-airport landing. Once the aircraft is on the ground, or on the water in this case, the pilot is out of the FAA’s jurisdiction granted by Congress. His best option for appeal is to the Department of the Interior, and even then their influence here is limited.
This is most ridiculous thing ive read. It was legal for him to land as was in emergency. Thus no trespassing occurred. The fact it remains there is 100% on tribe.
As this point FAA/DOT needs to step in and enforce federal law.
Im surprised a court order hasn’t been issued. Any delay is likely court not wanting to get into issues of tribal sovereignty. However SCOTUS is clear, the Feds are supreme. Tribe is only sovereign as far as Congress decides.
Is state highway 89 owned and maintained by the state of Minnesota or by the reservation?
The essence of the so called trespass charge was overflight of the Red Lake Reservation. The Tribe claims sovereignty up to 21,000 feet (not FL210). Not withstanding T383 (BJI-BDE) Airway crosses the Reservation with an MEA of 3500’ So, anyone accepting the following clearance is “trespassing?”
NxxxGA Cleared to Baudette Enter controlled airspace heading 270 direct BLUOX Tango 383; Climb and Maintain 5000, Squawk 4xxx Center 134.75. And subject to similar fines? I am not aware of any FAA regulation abandoning federal control of the airspace anywhere.
If he damaged anything, then yes, his insurance should cover it, but fines and donations? That is what we called “buying the farm” when we landed in a wheat field and we do pay for the crop damages.
So–the Red Lake Band CLAIMS ownership of the airspace up to 21,000’ MSL–but neither the tribe nor the FAA has bothered to note their claim on aviation charts, publications, or NOTAMS. I’ve flown over the area–IFR–with a clearance–and no notice from ATC.
I’ve also had a partial engine failure in a Cessna 210 in the area–and barely made it into Baudette, MN. For most of the area, THERE IS NO PLACE TO LAND–as the “land” is actually “swamp.”
The Band has far over-reached their claim of “ownership.” I suggest that the Federal and State government act in kind–withold State and Federal appropriations for the Tribe until they recognize the fact that they DON’T OWN THE AIRSPACE.
Jim Hanson–Minnesota
WHAT NEXT? Individual States, Counties, Municipalities, or even INDIVIDUAL OWNERS OF LAND also making claims of “airspace ownership?”
I’m wondering WHY the Federal Government hasn’t taken a position on this to settle it once and for all.
Well, it looks like the tribe’s lawyers have recognized the legal error in the tribe’s position. The tribe is now offering to release the aircraft along with a cash settlement. There’s not really an active legal dispute anymore except for the owner’s desire for more cash.