Flying in local parks...

[duhs10]

Wondering if anyone has tried to challenge local code when there is no clear mention of drone usage.

I live down the street from a county park and had the thought that I could get some nice footage of the lake. Being a cautious new pilot I wanted to make sure that flying in the park was legal. I read through all the county codes, prohibited activities, and local laws. There is nothing that prohibits the use of sUAS or drones. However the Marshal's office states under their FAQ that "drones are not allowed in county parks for safety reasons."

There are 2 codes that could be at play. One describing unauthorized vehicles, however all the examples listed are off road vehicles, cars, motorcycles, etc. The other code makes a blanket statement saying all activities that threatens the safety of people.

Is it even worth my time to engage the Marshal's office to see if there is a reasonable solution that would allow me to fly in the parks? I'm guessing they probably will shrug it off unless there is a legal challenge to the code. Which I'm not going to take the time and money to do.

I'm also curious what the safety implications are since I'm already prohibited from flying over people.

 

[Deleted member 79533]

Wondering if anyone has tried to challenge local code when there is no clear mention of drone usage.

I live down the street from a county park and had the thought that I could get some nice footage of the lake. Being a cautious new pilot I wanted to make sure that flying in the park was legal. I read through all the county codes, prohibited activities, and local laws. There is nothing that prohibits the use of sUAS or drones. However the Marshal's office states under their FAQ that "drones are not allowed in county parks for safety reasons."

There are 2 codes that could be at play. One describing unauthorized vehicles, however all the examples listed are off road vehicles, cars, motorcycles, etc. The other code makes a blanket statement saying all activities that threatens the safety of people.

Is it even worth my time to engage the Marshal's office to see if there is a reasonable solution that would allow me to fly in the parks? I'm guessing they probably will shrug it off unless there is a legal challenge to the code. Which I'm not going to take the time and money to do.

I'm also curious what the safety implications are since I'm already prohibited from flying over people.

IMO, the question is whether or not the "Marshall" has rulemaking authority. I think that to get that question answered, one will have to have an encounter with this authority and thereafter get a judicial determination.

Unfortunately, such a determination may incur substantial fees. Sadly, there are many such (perceived) abuses that are enforced by way of the affected citizens inability to afford a remedy.

 

[duhs10]

I'm not 100% but I believe the Marshal's role is code enforcement. Which is why I believe there is a legal challenge but agree that it would be too costly and time consuming. Perhaps there will be some type of town hall meeting at some point with an open forum where I can bring the issue publicly.

I was also wondering if anyone has had any success in speaking with the authorities in similar circumstances.

There is a local hobby shop that is involved with RC and drones... I think I will go speak with them to see if they've heard of anything.

 

[Nelson 1949]

I am currently in discussion with a local park on this exact subject. The contract document that allows you access on a yearly basis states that you have to follow posted park rules. I have checked and there are no posted drone rules at all. However, I am told that the flying of drones in the park is prohibited. BTW, this is Class G/Uncontrolled airspace. I have stated that an unpublished rule is not likely to be legally enforceable and has the potential to allow arbitrary action on almost any subject from park staff that could result in legal issues for the park if it ever goes to court.

I have pointed out this issue to several levels of park management and basically understand that their issue is potential liability. I noted that they allow activities such as skate boarding, roller blading, and bicycle riding in the park and these activities have a highe rpotential of damage to other people and property than a small drone does in the event of a collision with other people/property. I have suggested a number of ways to potentially limit park liability concerns while allowing drone takeoff and landing from the park. The park officials are supposedly considering my submission at this time and should respond in a timely manner.

I am ready to go directly to the Park Commission if needed to resolve this issue in a reasonable manner. I will keep everyone updated if I manage to either push this further up the ladder or am granted takeoff and landing permissions at the park

Nelson

 

[DSR]

Local authorities cannot regulate the flights of unmanned aircraft. See https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=22938. Local authorities do not have jurisdiction, and would be unable to fine you or carry you to court.

 

[BearSwartz]

Local authorities cannot regulate the flights of unmanned aircraft. See https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=22938. Local authorities do not have jurisdiction, and would be unable to fine you or carry you to court.

It's important to recognize that while local authorities cannot regulate flight, they CAN regulate ground operations, like takeoff and landings. So it is totally within their jurisdiction to say you can't takeoff or land from a park. If you were to launch from outside a park and fly above it, they can not regulate the flight itself, although I'm sure it would be fairly easy to find a local LEO who believes he can, and it would take a judge telling him otherwise to back him down.

 

[AMann]

It's important to recognize that while local authorities cannot regulate flight, they CAN regulate ground operations, like takeoff and landings. So it is totally within their jurisdiction to say you can't takeoff or land from a park. If you were to launch from outside a park and fly above it, they can not regulate the flight itself, although I'm sure it would be fairly easy to find a local LEO who believes he can, and it would take a judge telling him otherwise to back him down.

This rule is mostly correct, but some parks and open spaces, like some parts of the California coastline as well as parts of the National Parks, e.g., Grand Canyon NP, do have minimum AGL flight restriction areas and zones that are listed on the FAA sectional maps, many which are as high as 1000 ft, which means you wont be able to even fly above those areas.

VFRMAP - Digital Aeronautical Charts

 

[BearSwartz]

This rule is mostly correct, but some parks and open spaces, like some parts of the California coastline as well as parts of the National Parks, e.g., Grand Canyon NP, do have minimum AGL flight restriction areas and zones that are listed on the FAA sectional maps, many which are as high as 1000 ft, which means you wont be able to fly above them.

VFRMAP - Digital Aeronautical Charts

True! But that is FAA governing that. Curious, do you know if those restrictions show up in airmap or B4UFly? I fly out in the country, far away from any such places. If I were to go to Grand Canyon, would the restriction show in either of those apps?

 

[AMann]

True! But that is FAA governing that. Curious, do you know if those restrictions show up in airmap or B4UFly? I fly out in the country, far away from any such places. If I were to go to Grand Canyon, would the restriction show in either of those apps?

The areas shown on the sectionals are FAA administrated , and you can legally get cited by a Federal LEO (Federal Park Ranger, etc.) as they fall under the US CFR’s (its not out of their jurisdiction). Scroll in the map link to Grand Canyon- theres a specific sectional map for it that shows more details. Most of the main canyon has a minimum AGL set that is too high for drones to legally fly, and the park boundary is too far back for you to fly in from outside the park border.

Some if the areas show up in B4UFly, like Narional Parks, others don’t. I always check sectionals and B4UFly.

 

[BearSwartz]

The areas shown on the sectionals are FAA administrated , and you could get fined by a Federal LEO (Federal Park Ranger, etc.) as they fall under the US CFR’s. Scroll in the map link to Grand Canyon- theres a specific sectional map for it that shows more details. Most of the main canyon has a minimum AGL set that is too high for drones to legally fly, and the park boundary is too far back for you to fly in from outside the park border.

Some if the areas show up in B4UFly, like Narional Parks, others don’t. I always check sectionals and B4UFly.

I'm new to drones, and I don't fly a "real" plane. Being totally honest, that VFR map doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I love to learn and study new things, so I'm sure some day I'll be able to read one and know what it says. Gonna study it more now. And thanks for the resource!

 

[AMann]

I'm new to drones, and I don't fly a "real" plane. Being totally honest, that VFR map doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I love to learn and study new things, so I'm sure some day I'll be able to read one and know what it says. Gonna study it more now. And thanks for the resource!

You are welcome- if you ever decide to really get into it and want to fly commercially under section 107, those sectionals will be your “friend”!

 

[BearSwartz]

You are welcome- if you ever decide to really get into it and want to fly commercially under section 107, those sectionals will be your “friend”!

That will probably happen... At some point. Can you clarify something else for me? Are the minimum AGL rules always the same for both manned and unmanned? Seems they should be kept separated for obvious reasons... As in, 400 and below for us, and above that for the big guys. Are drones not allowed to fly anywhere there are minimum restrictions above 400 AGL?

 

[AMann]

That will probably happen... At some point. Can you clarify something else for me? Are the minimum AGL rules always the same for both manned and unmanned? Seems they should be kept separated for obvious reasons... As in, 400 and below for us, and above that for the big guys. Are drones not allowed to fly anywhere there are minimum restrictions above 400 AGL?

In cases like the marine mammal sanctuaries on CA coast, NOAA and CA Fish and Wildlife determined that drones and low flying planes do disturb otters, so they were able to have the FAA set a height above 1000’ AGL. As for Grand Canyon, it was due to the visual and sound impacts on the National Park, so both are included in the no fly zones (NFZ).

One good place to fly is on BLM and Forest Service lands, except in wilderness areas, most places in those areas are open to drone flying wherever they allow off road vehicles, hunting, etc.

Where are you located? There’s probably locals to you on this site that can point out good places to go in your area.

 

[Paul D]

I'm not 100% but I believe the Marshal's role is code enforcement. Which is why I believe there is a legal challenge but agree that it would be too costly and time consuming. Perhaps there will be some type of town hall meeting at some point with an open forum where I can bring the issue publicly.

I was also wondering if anyone has had any success in speaking with the authorities in similar circumstances.

There is a local hobby shop that is involved with RC and drones... I think I will go speak with them to see if they've heard of anything.

If your going to challenge police once they have made a decision, good luck. Even if it makes no sense their sense of entitlement will not allow common sense to replace the ego.

 

[BearSwartz]

In cases like the marine mammal sanctuaries on CA coast, NOAA and CA Fish and Wildlife determined that drones and low flying planes do disturb otters, so they were able to have the FAA set a height above 1000’ AGL. As for Grand Canyon, it was due to the visual and sound impacts on the National Park, so both are included in the no fly zones (NFZ).

One good place to fly is on BLM and Forest Service lands, except in wilderness areas, most places in those areas are open to drone flying wherever they allow off road vehicles, hunting, etc.

Where are you located? There’s probably locals to you on this site that can point out good places to go in your area.

That answered my question, if it's a NFZ it should show up on my maps...

I'm in western Colorado. As far as local places to fly, I got lots of that. I own 40 acres in a very rural setting, we live off a dirt road. So I fly from my front yard all the time. Neighbors rarely even know I'm flying. There's tons of BLM land I can go to all around here. Once I get the hang of editing video I'm sure I'll be posting some. I live a mile or 2 away from the Colorado National Monument, which is one of the most scenic NPs around. Tempting to make a pass over it, but I've refrained so far...

 

[tleedom]

In cases like the marine mammal sanctuaries on CA coast, NOAA and CA Fish and Wildlife determined that drones and low flying planes do disturb otters, so they were able to have the FAA set a height above 1000’ AGL. As for Grand Canyon, it was due to the visual and sound impacts on the National Park, so both are included in the no fly zones (NFZ).

One good place to fly is on BLM and Forest Service lands, except in wilderness areas, most places in those areas are open to drone flying wherever they allow off road vehicles, hunting, etc.

Where are you located? There’s probably locals to you on this site that can point out good places to go in your area.

Also being from Colorado don't forget National Forests are excellent areas for flying and we have plenty of those. This is the US Forests Service page covering UAS. Scrol down to the section titled Hobby or Recreational Use of UAS on National Forest System Lands for more info.

Unmanned Aircraft Systems | US Forest Service

 

[tleedom]

I think a lot of people lump National Forests in with National Parks for NFZ's. The NFS site goes as far as to post the following under the section:

Hobby or Recreational Use of UAS on National Forest System Lands

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)(link is external) has regulatory authority over all airspace, including recreational use of airspace by model aircraft (See FAA Advisory Circular 91-57) (link is external). The U.S. Forest Service does not have the authority to establish any additional regulations regarding where UAS can or can’t be flown.

 

[tleedom]

For those that need a place to fly in the US think about this.

In the United States there are 155 National Forests containing almost 190 million acres (297,000 mi²/769 000 km²) of land.

 

[AMann]

For those that need a place to fly in the US think about this.

In the United States there are 155 National Forests containing almost 190 million acres (297,000 mi²/769 000 km²) of land.

Add BLM rec area lands to the leat as well.

 

[kadras]

For those that need a place to fly in the US think about this.

In the United States there are 155 National Forests containing almost 190 million acres (297,000 mi²/769 000 km²) of land.

And here are the direct links to the Forest Service policy on flying UAVs in the forests.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems | US Forest Service
Tips for Responsible Hobby or Recreational Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) or "Drones" on National Forest Systems Lands | US Forest Service

And your friendly, local neighborhood forest specifically says this:
Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) or “drones” are increasing in popularity and can provide wonderful opportunities to explore the forest.
Pike and San Isabel National Forests Cimarron and Comanche National Grasslands - Recreation