The Military Wants to Dictate Private Land Use -- and Washington State Might Let It

Wow!! I can see value and misjudgment on both sides of this. Being stationed at ft Lewis before it became joint with macord afb and N ft, I wld love to come back and see just what they have done.
But I don't think that the State shld give up control of almost anything that will happen in the future to the military. I can see certain things. I wldnt want anyone operating a drone on my fence line at my house, let alone a military institutions. But closing access to the sound at any point sounds a little overboard. These military institutions arnt going anywhere. They're to important. One of the best strategic military bases in the U.S.. That's why you have 3rd of the 1st SF, 2nd of the 75th rangers, a gigantic afb. I cld go on and on. But I don't think that the State shld roll over and hand control over to the military.

Like the San Fran Bay politicians and lefty residents, the same mentality is going on in Washington state. The "progressive" residents would like nothing more than to shut down NAS Whidbey Island and the bases in Kitsap county (Bangor and Bremerton). They will cite noise and environment pollution, but they just are really just anti-military. As a home owner on Whidbey Island, I was very concerned that these loons would pressure politicians to curtail flight ops on and around the island. So far it has failed, but as the state goes farther left, who knows.

"For example, the Navy, which has already expressed a desire to control marine traffic along Puget Sound's Hood Canal region, could decide to close the waterway to all civilian traffic. Another Navy wish has been to end civilian drone traffic over civilian land near its bases "

Honestly I don't see an issue with either of these things. The waterway isn't private. There's a Trident base on that waterway, so stopping civilian traffic would be perfectly understandable. There's nothing beyond that base that would be hurt by it. It's a very rural area the further in you go. There's no industry that relies on seafaring.

Wanting to end civilian drone traffic within a proximity of a military installation is perfectly understandable too. You can't just fly a plane or a helicopter over a military installation, so why should a drone be any different? In fact, drones are more dangerous because the ones on the civilian market are so small so they pose a huge risk to military aircraft operating in and around the installations.

The military should have just as much say as anyone else as to what goes on near their bases, if for nothing else, the safety of everyone on either side of the fence. Civilian and military.