Drone-flying charges at beauty spots - Good idea/Bad idea?

[MavicNovice]

Apologies if this has been posted already, I've just seen this article today.
Row breaks out over drone-flying charge at Glenfinnan spot screened in Harry Potter films

In Scotland they have begun charging drone users who want to capture the famous Harry Potter viaduct at Glenfinnan...



My initial reaction was what the hell? But... at the price being asked (pretty reasonable for anyone who can afford a drone), is this a solution to access some of those (UK) areas currently protected by National/Heritage status? Thinking along the lines of Cotswolds, Lake District etc.?

I guess my main concern is that without a framework of regulation, these charges are arbitrary. What would stop them increasing the charge tenfold overnight?

What if another location decided they wanted to make their charge a sliding scale on numbers attending - £50 for the first 10 drone pilots on the day, £100 for the next 10 and so on.

Perhaps I am the owner of a premium attraction somewhere and I decide to make a mint from drone pilots seeking aerial footage, by insisting on an unrealistic fee?

What are your thoughts?

 

[Meta4]

Do they charge terrestrial camera users to take photos?
Why should users of aerial cameras be treated any differently?

On another note, I'd be reluctant to put my drone up knowing there were another five going to be buzzing around the same area.

 

[naiku]

Assuming that the drones are not causing any damages (can't see how they would be) then I think it's a ridiculous charge. As the poster above wrote, do they charge photographers on the ground? Of which I'd bet there are more.

 

[THE WOMBLE]

If it means that you can fly around these beauty spots rather than be banned yep go for it as long as you don't need a bank overdraft to pay for it.

 

[The Fat Controller]

Many locations charge a fee for professional photography such as wedding shoots (my local Town Hall's walled garden for example). There are no charges for members of the public taking photos for personal use. I'll bet the movie company paid heavy fees to the estate for use of the location. There isn't any reason to treat a drone differently from any other camera providing its owner is following the rules. My DSLR takes far better photos than my Mavic but my Mavic gives me a far better choice of viewpoints. I normally use both DSLR and drone when out for the day.

 

[devisger]

Hogwash.