Harriman State Park - Perkins Memorial Drive: No Drones Sign

[Supernootz]

This is a beautiful overlook with direct view of the Bear Mountain Bridge and Hudson River. A wonder of scenery. But at the base of the road that leads up the mountain is a sign that says No Drones. Anyone know what the reason is? I wonder if it's because of hawks or eagles in the area.

And since the NYS Park Police patrol the area, I assume they would enforce this rule, but I don't think it's a law. What would the penalty be if caught flying?

 

[anotherlab]

This is a beautiful overlook with direct view of the Bear Mountain Bridge and Hudson River. A wonder of scenery. But at the base of the road that leads up the mountain is a sign that says No Drones. Anyone know what the reason is? I wonder if it's because of hawks or eagles in the area.

And since the NYS Park Police patrol the area, I assume they would enforce this rule, but I don't think it's a law. What would the penalty be if caught flying?

"The launch, landing, and operation of UAS is allowed in state parks and historic sites only with prior written approval by the agency through a permit authorizing the specific time, location and type of use"

Source: https://parks.ny.gov/documents/insi...aftSystemsDronesModelAirplanesQuadCopters.pdf

Also see Drone Use On DEC Managed Lands

 

[Supernootz]

"The launch, landing, and operation of UAS is allowed in state parks and historic sites only with prior written approval by the agency through a permit authorizing the specific time, location and type of use"

Source: https://parks.ny.gov/documents/insi...aftSystemsDronesModelAirplanesQuadCopters.pdf

Also see Drone Use On DEC Managed Lands

Since that's the case, why don't they have signs like this at the entrance to the state park itself. This is just one scenic spot.

 

[mavic3usa]

Since that's the case, why don't they have signs like this at the entrance to the state park itself. This is just one scenic spot.

Obviously they are trying to stop drone pilots for flying and filming in that particular area. Anytime you see something like this, you know they're b.s.:

"Just as the sound and sight of drones can be disruptive to wildlife, they can also disturb other users on the trail, summit, or wherever you are flying. Drones alter the natural wilderness experience that many seek in nature and can make users feel like their privacy has been invaded. Before flying your drone be sure the location is clear of people or speak to everyone around and receive permission and approval to fly your drone nearby. Keep in mind that flying drones around others could lead to potential penal law violations such as harassment or invasion of privacy."

Why not be the first one to challenge this and take it to court if you have to?

Otherwise, I would pay attention to this and see if it is applicable to you:

"OPRHP’s statute, regulations, this new procedure and permits shall apply only to a UAS launched from within OPRHP-controlled property. A UAS that is launched from outside of OPRHP property but flown over OPRHP-controlled property is regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) and adjacent landowners."

 

[anotherlab]

Since that's the case, why don't they have signs like this at the entrance to the state park itself. This is just one scenic spot.

Because they want to discourage the use of drones at that location.

 

[anotherlab]

If the penal code or the # is not listed on the sign I doubt it's actually a law.

That's a faulty assumption. That would be like stating that speed limit signs would not be valid if they didn't list a penal code on the sign. That's not how it works.

The second post in this thread has a link to a document that states that recreational flyers need permission before flying in a NY State Park.

The OP said this was in Harriman State Park. Perkins Memorial Drive is one park over,, in Bear Mountain State Park. Perkins Memorial Drive leads up to Perkins Tower, which provides views of the entire park. That makes it an attractive place to fly a drone from. By placing a sign at the start of Perkins Memorial Drive, it's very clear that you can't fly a drone there. You can't use the excuse that you didn't know that drones are not allowed

 

[mavic3usa]

That's a faulty assumption. That would be like stating that speed limit signs would not be valid if they didn't list a penal code on the sign. That's not how it works.

The second post in this thread has a link to a document that states that recreational flyers need permission before flying in a NY State Park.

The OP said this was in Harriman State Park. Perkins Memorial Drive is one park over,, in Bear Mountain State Park. Perkins Memorial Drive leads up to Perkins Tower, which provides views of the entire park. That makes it an attractive place to fly a drone from. By placing a sign at the start of Perkins Memorial Drive, it's very clear that you can't fly a drone there. You can't use the excuse that you didn't know that drones are not allowed

I believe the thought is in most states, there are certain instances where posting a sign with "the rules" requires a reference to the code as well in order to be considered effective notice. Pretty sure in every state the traffic laws and codes are not part of this. Neither would be a "no trespassing sign" because those have different rules by law such as size of the letters, color of the sign, etc.

The lack of a code doesn't mean the law doesn't exist, but it would probably make it difficult for the state to enforce it against you *if* it were a requirement to include the code for effective notification. Anyone can print up and post a sign or make one and stick it in the ground or attach it to a tree, the code reference is supposed to give it some legal authority. If you walked into the city park and you saw a sign that said "No music" or "No dogs" what does that mean? Can you use headphones? Are service dogs allowed? Personally I think NY should reference the code so the flyer can fully understand what you can't put into words on the sign which is you can't take off or land here or stand here and operate a UAV.

 

[PyroProdigy]

That's a faulty assumption. That would be like stating that speed limit signs would not be valid if they didn't list a penal code on the sign. That's not how it works.

The second post in this thread has a link to a document that states that recreational flyers need permission before flying in a NY State Park.

The OP said this was in Harriman State Park. Perkins Memorial Drive is one park over,, in Bear Mountain State Park. Perkins Memorial Drive leads up to Perkins Tower, which provides views of the entire park. That makes it an attractive place to fly a drone from. By placing a sign at the start of Perkins Memorial Drive, it's very clear that you can't fly a drone there. You can't use the excuse that you didn't know that drones are not allowed

Doesn't the FAA regulate aircraft not the state?

 

[mavic3usa]

Doesn't the FAA regulate aircraft not the state?

eta: wrong thread

 

[anotherlab]

Doesn't the FAA regulate aircraft not the state?

They regulate the airspace, not the location from which you take off and land.

 

[anotherlab]

I believe the thought is in most states, there are certain instances where posting a sign with "the rules" requires a reference to the code as well in order to be considered effective notice.

Do you have a reference for that?

The lack of a code doesn't mean the law doesn't exist, but it would probably make it difficult for the state to enforce it against you *if* it were a requirement to include the code for effective notification.

It's not a law, it's a rule for that specific location of the park. If a museum says "no flash photography" in front of an exhibit, that's all they need to put up.

Anyone can print up and post a sign or make one and stick it in the ground or attach it to a tree, the code reference is supposed to give it some legal authority.

By that argument, anyone could make a fake sign with a fake code reference.

If you walked into the city park and you saw a sign that said "No music" or "No dogs" what does that mean? Can you use headphones? Are service dogs allowed?

The legal protection for service dogs provided by the ADA would take precedence over a "No dogs" sign for most situations.

Personally I think NY should reference the code so the flyer can fully understand what you can't put into words on the sign which is you can't take off or land here or stand here and operate a UAV.

Or you could just look up the rules and regulations first. If you are flying a drone somewhere, it's your responsibility to make sure that you can launch and operate it from that location.

 

[mavic3usa]

I believe the thought is in most states, there are certain instances where posting a sign with "the rules" requires a reference to the code as well in order to be considered effective notice.

Do you have a reference for that?

I think you are kinda missing my point. Failure to cite or reference a code, ordinance, or statute or the incorrect one could diminish the case against you especially if the sign is vague or confusing. Omitting the citation so you "don't get it wrong" and/or leave the citizen guessing or to just take your word for it, personally I feel that has due process implications. That's just my personal opinion and I guess each person will have to work that out between him and his lawyer if it comes down to that. Google has some reference to this topic if you would like to take a look.

 

[mavic3usa]

The lack of a code doesn't mean the law doesn't exist, but it would probably make it difficult for the state to enforce it against you *if* it were a requirement to include the code for effective notification.

It's not a law, it's a rule for that specific location of the park. If a museum says "no flash photography" in front of an exhibit, that's all they need to put up.

Of course it's not a law as only a government agency can make a law. If a museum (a private museum) says "no flash photography" then that is their rule or their policy and it's not a law and the state cannot enforce that against the citizen. That's all they need to put up in order to explain their rules but it cannot be enforced by "law enforcement." At that point, the private museum can see to trespass you but under no circumstances can "no flash photography" be enforced against you. I realize this sounds like double-speak but there are two applicable points to make regarding that sign: if the private museum said "no red hats" on a sign (which they have the right to do) then it's possible they could face 1st amendment challenges should someone believe their rights are being violated. Also if it's a public museum and they said "no photography" that could also be a problem (unlike with private property). My point is a sign with no code is way less effective especially when it comes to enforcement. Even then, the code has to be proper; I've seen "No photography" signs incorrectly site HIPAA laws and Privacy laws way too often.

 

[mavic3usa]

The legal protection for service dogs provided by the ADA would take precedence over a "No dogs" sign for most situations.

You and I both know that but most citizens and quite a few business don't know that; even the police don't always know it. Exactly why it helps to have the statute posted under "No Dogs" so we can read it where it will likely show the exclusions.

 

[mavic3usa]

Personally I think NY should reference the code so the flyer can fully understand what you can't put into words on the sign which is you can't take off or land here or stand here and operate a UAV.

Or you could just look up the rules and regulations first. If you are flying a drone somewhere, it's your responsibility to make sure that you can launch and operate it from that location.

Ok, let me see if I understand. A sign that says "No drones" which really means "No landing, launching, or operating drones while *on* the property" but doesn't prohibit flying over the property, you believe it is sufficient to simply say "No drones" because the flyer should be responsible for properly interpreting the sign and knowing whether he can fly or not irrespective of that sign, right?

Even thought we both know that most drone flyers don't know all the finer details of the complex (implied) rules (especially the part about flying over property) *and* we know many governments fully intend for their "No drones" signs to *include* flying over the property (whether you land or launch on it or not). I guess that's fine but I disagree and don't think it's effective.

 

[PINEBARON]

My in-house police enforces rules without displaying any signs.
We are invited to a summer party this afternoon at my wife's work colleague's home lawns. I don't really know anyone there and asked if I could take my drone and she said 'NO'. Rather than ruin an entire weekend on a disagreement, I said absolutely nothing. Be a very boring party for me, the only part I'll enjoy, will be the drive there and back, in my beautiful truck, through country roads etc.