Another great reason drones should be kept out of America's National Parks

[Mr. Salty]

What about campfires that get out of control??

People have been arrested and have faced huge (millions of dollars) fines in cases like that.

 

[Classic flyer]

People have been arrested and have faced huge (millions of dollars) fines in cases like that.

Ok so let's do the same for drone violaters

 

[ryanolivas]

In my opinion they aren’t a threat. They are just another wonderful tool some of use to capture the magnificent places in our country. It’s the few idiots that cant obey the rules that ruin it for the rest of us. I fly my drone exactly as I’m suppose to and never take risks or screw around. For those of you that cant or wont follow the rules please stop flying your drone and sell it.

The concept of the drone is not a threat but the only thing which makes it a treat is the person/people using it for illegal purposes.

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

Umm, no not really.

Like SAR 104 said, NPS airspace is NOT restricted, unless it is designated Wilderness.

I have personally had NPS rangers give me their blessing to fly over the park from outside the boundary.

Not all of them might be so knowledgeable or drone friendly however, so I’m not recommending it for anyone, but just getting the facts straight.

If a NPS Ranger gave you their blessing then I sure would get that in writing because there are in fact NO FLY ZONES over ALL National Parks. Try using the AIRMAP app and then use the FAA's latest program for UAS pilots. It's called the Low Altitude Authorization and Notification Capability or L.A.A.N.C. program. Then you will know precisely where you can fly and where you cannot fly legally.

 

[Classic flyer]

If a NPS Ranger gave you their blessing then I sure would get that in writing because there are in fact NO FLY ZONES over ALL National Parks. Try using the AIRMAP app and then use the FAA's latest program for UAS pilots. It's called the Low Altitude Authorization and Notification Capability or L.A.A.N.C. program. Then you will know precisely where you can fly and where you cannot fly legally.

Good info sir... Thanx for your post...be safe, fly smart

 

[sar104]

Good info sir... Thanx for your post...be safe, fly smart

No it isn't good info - it's completely incorrect info which this guy keeps spamming across multiple threads.

 

[Classic flyer]

No it isn't good info - it's completely incorrect info which this guy keeps spamming across multiple threads.

So the sites he gave reference to are bogus?

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

Actually, no.

There is an National Park Service policy that prohibits landing and launching drones from NPS property.

NPS has no authorization to control the airspace over those properties. That is spelled out in the policy memo.

The FAA has not created a NFZ over National Park Service properties.

Maybe you aren't looking in the right place! There is definitely a NO FLY ZONE over all National Parks in the United States anyway...... Try using the FAA's L.A.A.N.C. program where UAS pilots can get up to the minute information on NOTEMS in your National Airspace.
View media item 2148
View media item 2147

 

[Classic flyer]

Maybe you aren't looking in the right place! There is definitely a NO FLY ZONE over all National Parks in the United States anyway...... Try using the FAA's L.A.A.N.C. program where UAS pilots can get up to the minute information on NOTEMS in your National Airspace.
View media item 2148
View media item 2147

Again I thank you

 

[sar104]

So the sites he gave reference to are bogus?

The sites are not bogus - his interpretation of the rules is bogus. He refuses to acknowledge the difference between the NPS rules on sUAS operations and the FAA rules on airspace. The AirMap graphics are referencing the NPS rules, not any FAA rules:



It even states in his screenshot - "under the control of the National Park Service". He may be confused by the statement "Do not fly over US national parks", but it's in the same section (NPS rules). There is no general FAA no fly zone over National Parks - there is no FAA document referencing such a thing, and the sectional maps are the definitive airspace description. As I posted previously, but he completely ignored, of course, Grand Canyon National Park does have a special flight rules area, but it is an exception:



Yosemite is Class G airspace:




A few other sites have restricted airspace due to security concerns under a specific agreement between the FAA and DOI:

• Statue of Liberty National Monument, New York, NY
• Boston National Historical Park (U.S.S. Constitution), Boston, MA
• Independence National Historical Park, Philadelphia, PA
• Folsom Dam; Folsom, CA
• Glen Canyon Dam; Lake Powell, AZ
• Grand Coulee Dam; Grand Coulee, WA
• Hoover Dam; Boulder City, NV
• Jefferson National Expansion Memorial; St. Louis, MO
• Mount Rushmore National Memorial; Keystone, SD
• Shasta Dam; Shasta Lake, CA

Most other National Parks / Monuments have no restrictions beyond the NPS rules, and he will continue to be unable to cite a single FAA document that supports his incorrect assertions.

 

[Classic flyer]

The sites are not bogus - his interpretation of the rules is bogus. He refuses to acknowledge the difference between the NPS rules on sUAS operations and the FAA rules on airspace. The AirMap graphics are referencing the NPS rules, not any FAA rules:

View attachment 43588

It even states in his screenshot - "under the control of the National Park Service". He may be confused by the statement "Do not fly over US national parks", but it's in the same section (NPS rules). There is no general FAA no fly zone over National Parks - there is no FAA document referencing such a thing, and the sectional maps are the definitive airspace description. As I posted previously, but he completely ignored, of course, Grand Canyon National Park does have a special flight rules area, but it is an exception:

View attachment 43589

Yosemite is Class G airspace:

View attachment 43590


A few other sites have restricted airspace due to security concerns under a specific agreement between the FAA and DOI:

• Statue of Liberty National Monument, New York, NY
• Boston National Historical Park (U.S.S. Constitution), Boston, MA
• Independence National Historical Park, Philadelphia, PA
• Folsom Dam; Folsom, CA
• Glen Canyon Dam; Lake Powell, AZ
• Grand Coulee Dam; Grand Coulee, WA
• Hoover Dam; Boulder City, NV
• Jefferson National Expansion Memorial; St. Louis, MO
• Mount Rushmore National Memorial; Keystone, SD
• Shasta Dam; Shasta Lake, CA

Most other National Parks / Monuments have no restrictions beyond the NPS rules, and he will continue to be unable to cite a single FAA document that supports his incorrect assertions.

And to that sir, I say thank you...be safe, fly smart

 

[pftarch]

Even if one concedes that the FAA doesn't restrict flight over National Parks, as I understand it, the park service CAN ban taking off or landing in the park.

At best, I can see my Mavic for 1000-2000 ft (and 2000 ft is a stretch). The FAA is clear about NO flying beyond visual line of sight, so, as I interpret it, your limited to flying 2000' from a park border.

As most National Parks are wider than 4000 ft (2000 ft from each border), they have effectively banned UAS flight over the vast majority of their land.

As the FAA does NOT limit manned aircraft flight to VLOS of take off areas, I feel that the "airspace is airspace" and the "same rules apply to manned aircraft" argument does not hold up when applied to UAS operations.

I still feel that the "ban" on National Park (land or flight, you decide) is excessive and unwarranted.

 

[sar104]

As the FAA does NOT limit manned aircraft flight to VLOS of take off areas, I feel that the "airspace is airspace" and the "same rules apply to manned aircraft" argument does not hold up when applied to UAS operations.

No - airspace is airspace and, from an airspace perspective, the same rules apply to sUAS operations above NPS land as apply to manned aircraft. That UAVs can't necessarily use all that airspace due to range limitations, altitude limitations or VLOS rules is an entirely different issue.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

The sites are not bogus - his interpretation of the rules is bogus. He refuses to acknowledge the difference between the NPS rules on sUAS operations and the FAA rules on airspace. The AirMap graphics are referencing the NPS rules, not any FAA rules:

View attachment 43588

It even states in his screenshot - "under the control of the National Park Service". He may be confused by the statement "Do not fly over US national parks", but it's in the same section (NPS rules). There is no general FAA no fly zone over National Parks - there is no FAA document referencing such a thing, and the sectional maps are the definitive airspace description. As I posted previously, but he completely ignored, of course, Grand Canyon National Park does have a special flight rules area, but it is an exception:

View attachment 43589

Yosemite is Class G airspace:

View attachment 43590


A few other sites have restricted airspace due to security concerns under a specific agreement between the FAA and DOI:

• Statue of Liberty National Monument, New York, NY
• Boston National Historical Park (U.S.S. Constitution), Boston, MA
• Independence National Historical Park, Philadelphia, PA
• Folsom Dam; Folsom, CA
• Glen Canyon Dam; Lake Powell, AZ
• Grand Coulee Dam; Grand Coulee, WA
• Hoover Dam; Boulder City, NV
• Jefferson National Expansion Memorial; St. Louis, MO
• Mount Rushmore National Memorial; Keystone, SD
• Shasta Dam; Shasta Lake, CA

Most other National Parks / Monuments have no restrictions beyond the NPS rules, and he will continue to be unable to cite a single FAA document that supports his incorrect assertions.

Thanks.

I no longer had the energy or desire.

 

[pftarch]

A small correction here - the rules for drones are exactly the same as the rules for helicopters or any other aircraft - you can fly over the park but you cannot takeoff or land (except in a flight emergency) without NPS permission.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one.

The rules for drones are NOT the same as the rules for helicopters or aircraft as helicopters or aircraft do NOT have VLOS limitations. Saying that you can fly in airspace that it is illegal to get to effectively means that you can't fly in the airspace. It's not an FAA requirement, but it is, nonetheless, an effective sUAS ban over National Parks.

I believe that restricting sUAS operations in LIMITED areas of National Parks is prudent. I feel that the effective outright ban is excessive.

 

[sar104]

We will have to agree to disagree on this one.

The rules for drones are NOT the same as the rules for helicopters or aircraft as helicopters or aircraft do NOT have VLOS limitations. Saying that you can fly in airspace that it is illegal to get to effectively means that you can't fly in the airspace. It's not an FAA requirement, but it is, nonetheless, an effective sUAS ban over National Parks.

I believe that restricting sUAS operations in LIMITED areas of National Parks is prudent. I feel that the effective outright ban is excessive.

The VLOS regulation is not an airspace regulation, and we were talking about airspace regulations.

I agree with you on the NPS restrictions.

 

[sar104]

Thanks.

I no longer had the energy or desire.

I know what you mean. He's either painfully dumb or trolling, or perhaps even both. And he employs the currently popular technique of ignoring all evidence explaining that he is wrong, and just carries on repeating the same specious arguments as if nothing had happened. Kind of like that guy in D.C..

 

[Robert Mitchell]

... Saying that you can fly in airspace that it is illegal to get to effectively means that you can't fly in the airspace. It's not an FAA requirement, but it is, nonetheless, an effective sUAS ban over National Parks...

How is it illegal to get to? And in some cases it is NOT an effective ban. In other cases, and in large areas of the larger parks, I would agree. However, case-in-point...

Recently, I was flying from what I thought was outside the boundaries of the Canaveral National Seashore. I was approached by a ranger who nicely informed me that I was, in fact, inside the recently expanded park boundary. He pointed me to a location about 100 yards further up the road, and said "fly all you want from up there". After a nice conversation about the absurdity of the fact that drones were banned but ultralights, helos, and small planes regularly pass over the National Seashore at barely treetop altitude, that is exactly what I proceeded to do. I was actually able to get some fantastic footage of a great deal of isolated and uninhabited, landscape, and well within VLOS.

This same situation has served me well on parts of the Blue Ridge Parkway, Great Smokey's, Cape Hatteras National Seashore, and several State Parks, also banned in my state.

I am not bragging or advocating for others to follow my example, and I'm not trying to "get away" with anything. I just feel that as long as it is not illegal, it remains legal. I will exercise my right, when appropriate, safe, and prudent, to photograph the pristine landscapes that belong to us all, in a non-intrusive manner.

I remain hopeful that the powers that be, will do their jobs, and make it a little easier for others to do the same.

I might also add, for the naysayer purists out there, the ranger I encountered, went on to say he would fly his own drone there if not for the ridiculous ban. I've also heard this from others.

 

[lmel2005]

Finally, what's the reasons for banning drones out of parks, in us?

Noise? Pollution? They disturb wildlife? They disturb visitors? Some are afraid of technology? All of these? Something else?

I really didn't understand.

 

[BIGDAVE]

How many percentage of people own drones in the entire country? It's probably less than 1% out of 400 million people. Compare that to the amount of people visiting the national parks everyday. How drones can be a threat?

Part of the reasons is that people bother the wildlife. diving in on bird nests chasing large animals etc etc. so I can see their concern do I agree with it not entirely. these aren't simple toys anymore they are flying computers.