And yes, since my opinion, or any others opinion that takes the National Parks and the reasons it was established in the first place first and foremost, would indeed be a grand candidate as a steward.
I've already stated in previous posts, hey I'd love to fly a NP. At first I was for it, after reasoningr i chose not to.
Not because of the law, rule or reg. Because that's not what the Parks were designated for.
They didn't set aside these small treks of land for snowmobiles or dirt bikes to run through. They didn't set them aside for oil and gas to start drilling in. Or loggers to deforest. Or planes and choppers to run tourist through. Or for tourist to fly RC craft through.
If you don't get that then what do think they created the NPs for?
Because I chose to stick to the parks initial intended purpose and design. Doesn't make me not like technology. Even if I were a hard core tree hugger that's way off track thinking.
Working with nature doesn't mean lack of development. Of anything.
You do know how little forests are left in the USA don't you?
Here's how it looks past to present:
In reality, as you can clearly see, "the people/public" don't have that many trees left to hug.
So yeah, I'd kick everyone out of the NPs that doesn't have the parks interest in mind.
Just because some parks are allowing snowmobiles in doesn't make it right for snowmobiles to be there. That's a for profit interest not a preserve the park interest.
It doesn't matter whether or not your bird is 100 get in the air, runs perfectly silent, or has a hyper alloy combat chassis air frame undetectable by only the most eagle of eyes.
It doesn't follow the parks intended use.
I could see park rangers flying them for various reasons... But not tourist.
Don't miss construe my point. Just because other things are allowed now doesn't mean they should've been allowed. I'll bet some came about as payoff to the people so they wouldn't raise heck about other goings on.
One of those government slight of hand gestures. We'll give you this, cause like it or not we're doing that.
I've seen it dozens of times.
Oh did you want to party? Goodie. We'll look the other way, party it up.
Don't mind us, we're passing a law to put an oil rig in your back yard.
Which btw, drilling for oil is an antiqued technology and methodology.[/QUOTE]
Given the variety of activities allowed in NPs, I think it would be somewhat arrogant to define the "parks intended use" for the rest of us.
Edit: I would argue, documenting pristine landscapes by whatever means available, especially one as impact friendly as a small drone, actually IS one of their intended purposes.
And BTW, it's 84 million acres, not huge compared to the entire US, but not an insignificant amount.
Now, add bans in state parks, municipal parks, military and critical infrastructure, private property and state property in states where actual permission is mandated, and the recent tendency for every state, county, and town hall to attempt either bans or regulation.
NPs are just the tip of an iceberg, whereas your hobby is concerned. You might want to begin advocating for your hobby if you want it to survive.