Has anybody ever flown in a national park?

[Dabrain]

and those "activities" have age requirements and can only be done in controlled areas. your mavic on the other hand is a flying lipo fire bomb that can get into areas in a national park that might only be accessible to firefighters by air.

That is true To a degree, very small chance of happening. Please state an incident world wide that an operational model aircraft has started a fire.

 

[Sprocket]

That is true To a degree, very small chance of happening. Please state an incident world wide that an operational model aircraft has started a fire.

Drone lands, catches fire, ignites wildfire - Fire Aviation

 

[Pingman68]

That is true To a degree, very small chance of happening. Please state an incident world wide that an operational model aircraft has started a fire.

I agree, that’s almost like saying we should ban commercial flights because of what happened recently with that Southwest flight.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

Oh, good, this discussion again.

All of the other items mentioned above come with restrictions on where and when they can be used in a national park. You can’t drive your Harley or Winnebago down a nature trail, but any yutz with a Mavic can carry it into the backcountry.

And motorcycles are drawing an increasing number of complaints, and the NPS is finally starting to take them seriously. Look for more restrictions on those in the future. It’s already being discussed.

Ultimately I don’t think the restrictions on drones have anything to do with fire dangers or whether they’ll upset the animals, although those are valid concerns.

The real reason drones are banned is because they can be really annoying and the general public doesn’t want them there, period. If they were allowed you wouldn’t be the only person trying to get “badass shots” of some beautiful location. Among the thousands of national park visitors on any given day, there would be a lot of them with drones.

The national parks are already overcrowded and understaffed. The last thing we need is a dozen drones buzzing around the most popular spots in the park at any given moment. And while every one of us likes to think of ourselves as the next Chuck Yeager with these things, I think we all know there will be plenty of idiots crashing their drones, getting them lost in trees, hitting people, you name it. You’ve read the threads here started by people who have crashed their drones.

The day the NPS allows drones in national parks is the day our hobby starts feeling some real backlash from the public. And I won’t blame them.

You are probably correct. The reason they are banned is because people just don’t want them there. So why don’t they just quit with the “reasons”?

I’ll tell you why. You just can’t justify banning something which causes no harm, because you don’t “like” it.

That’s exactly what they have done and it won’t stand the test of time.

 

[Mr. Salty]

I disagree completely. Whenever I fly a drone somewhere the initial reaction has always been overwhelmingly positive. People approach me constantly asking questions and saying how cool it is. Even though drones are everywhere, you need to keep in mind that 9/10 people rarely ever see one.

That’s when there’s one of you in some random location. You would get a very different reaction if you and a bunch of other people were all buzzing around El Capitan, the Grand Canyon or Yellowstone all at the same time.

It seems terribly lazy for the NPS to outright ban something that only the small majority are ever going to abuse.

Nice Freudian slip with “small majority.”

At least two tourists crashed their drone in sensitive areas of Yellowstone in 2014 alone, triggering serious concerns on what one of them could do to the Grand Prismatic Spring. Drones are a lot more mainstream now. It would only be worse.

Your logic is extremely flawed.

No it isn’t. That’s why drones are banned in national parks and there’s no serious effort being made to change that.

 

[dronerdave]

In Yosemite they regulate some standard photography at specific times of the year due to the popularity of the event. I don't have an issue with the park service looking at opening up spots for the use of UAV photgraphy under some regulation. But how do park officials control that when is obvious that people push the legal limits right now? It's a shame they can't find some central ground but I don't see the park service wanting to add more on their list of duties to monitor. Just makes me laugh when I can't take a aerial picture of my vehicle off roading in Death Valley when there's nobody w/i eyesight. Wish they would allow low level flying with a controlled flight distance in certain spots.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

In Yosemite they regulate some standard photography at specific times of the year due to the popularity of the event. I don't have an issue with the park service looking at opening up spots for the use of UAV photgraphy under some regulation. But how do park officials control that when is obvious that people push the legal limits right now? It's a shame they can't find some central ground but I don't see the park service wanting to add more on their list of duties to monitor. Just makes me laugh when I can't take a aerial picture of my vehicle off roading in Death Valley when there's nobody w/i eyesight. Wish they would allow low level flying with a controlled flight distance in certain spots.

It's usually all or nothing in situations like this, and why I hate onerous government overreactions.

It's easier for them to just say no, than to put forth a little effort to figure it out.

 

[black_magic100]

That’s when there’s one of you in some random location. You would get a very different reaction if you and a bunch of other people were all buzzing around El Capitan, the Grand Canyon or Yellowstone all at the same time.



Nice Freudian slip with “small majority.”

At least two tourists crashed their drone in sensitive areas of Yellowstone in 2014 alone, triggering serious concerns on what one of them could do to the Grand Prismatic Spring. Drones are a lot more mainstream now. It would only be worse.



No it isn’t. That’s why drones are banned in national parks and there’s no serious effort being made to change that.

Just because the government outright bans something doesn't mean they are correct. Look at how long weed has been illegal. Finally the stupid beauracrats are realizing how much money they can make off of it and are now legalizing/regulating it. You mentioned the drone industry is rapidly expanding. I am an opportunist and I see this as a perfect opportunity for the gov't to make some good money. Not sure why you are defending this ban. The pros far outweigh the cons. The logistics may be a bit difficult as far as regulations go, but that certainly shouldn't justify an outright ban indefinitely. Simply starting off by allowing the use of drones for only those carrying a part 107 license would be a good start. Further requirements can then be added from there wherever they see fit.

 

[Mr. Salty]

I am an opportunist and I see this as a perfect opportunity for the gov't to make some good money.

Here’s Webster’s definition of “opportunist”:

“Someone who tries to get an advantage or something valuable from a situation without thinking about what is fair or right.”

 

[forsythem]

Here’s Webster’s definition of “opportunist”:

“Someone who tries to get an advantage or something valuable from a situation without thinking about what is fair or right.”

Sounds like a great majority of the human population.

Then try and pin down the definitions of "fair" and "right"...

 

[Tinmania]

Here’s Webster’s definition of “opportunist”:

“Someone who tries to get an advantage or something valuable from a situation without thinking about what is fair or right.”

Did you happen to also look up the definition of curmudgeon?



Mike

 

[MavicNoob79]

Even my local township park that I contacted said they don't want me flying there but have no codes saying I can't. State parks make their own rules so it's useless to complain really. There's many other places to capture nature's wonders

 

[Paul2660]

So many folks seem to forget, liability. I realize the fact that having a drone fall on someone's head is probably much less than being struck by lightening, however it's still possible. In Arkansas, my home state, no flying in the state parks without a permit and the first thing they are asking for is liability insurance. I don't see this policy changing, and in fact odds are that in 4 to 5 years the restrictions will be much tighter. One thing for sure, DJI, needs to work on noise for their larger drones. Arkansas still has a ton of Public Land, not National Parks which is still allowed for now.

Arkansas's Buffalo River is a National River and again no flying. Tragic, as you can easily find remote spots, with no one around to fly, but rules are what they are.

This time last year I was in Yosemite when they had the most water running in over 15 years. In fact the park began to flood. There was someone flying a drone at least once every day, in the lower valley. Very quick flights, out and back, but they were flown. Not about to say this is a good thing, but in Yosemite, the noise in the valley can become an issue for sure. Sadly most of the concerns issues I have seen are from the Phantom series, they are larger, make a bigger show and much louder. The Mavic once it's above 100 to 150 feet is very hard to hear and the noise is not at all what the sound of a Spark or P4 is.

There was a beautiful shot posted on this the Phantom forum of a sunset at Devils tower. Pilot just found the boundary of the National Monument, then flew from there, still got a great shot. I realize this is not possible in most of if not all the National parks, especially Yosemite or Grand Canyon. But in some instances it might work.

Paul Caldwell

 

[Just_nick]

No, because I don't need the possibility of a ticket, having to fight it/pay a fine, or the possibility of a crash and damage/injury all so I can get a stupid photo when I'm there to enjoy nature. If I want a shot of it, I'll do it from outside the park

 

[black_magic100]

Here’s Webster’s definition of “opportunist”:

“Someone who tries to get an advantage or something valuable from a situation without thinking about what is fair or right.”

There is no need to turn this into a pissing match. This is a forum for discussion so if you don't have anything to add then don't say anything at all.

 

[Dabrain]

Drone lands, catches fire, ignites wildfire - Fire Aviation

Well there you go, not much information there though. That's one, any more? Should be thousands of them since there are millions of UAV,s in the air eaçh day.

 

[black_magic100]

No, because I don't need the possibility of a ticket, having to fight it/pay a fine, or the possibility of a crash and damage/injury all so I can get a stupid photo when I'm there to enjoy nature. If I want a shot of it, I'll do it from outside the park

I get your point. Definitely a big hassle and probably not worth the risk.

Not sure why you seem so hostile about getting a photo though when that is literally the entire point of having the drone (excluding the fact that its just fun to fly)[emoji16]

I think my biggest gripe is that if a drone should be allowed to be flown anywhere a national park would be the first place that I would consider using it.

1. Big open space
2. Not a lot of people if any at all
3. Little possibility of causing harm
4. Stunning scenery
5. More videos = more tourists

There is also the fact that if the government continues to ban every single place to fly people will either a) quit buying drones or b) just ignore the law entirely and fly anywhere they want. Considering "history repeats itself", I'd place my money on the latter.

 

[hychewright]

Not a good idea.

 

[macoman]

Just make sure you have the low noise propellers and you are hidden you are good

Even if he is hidden... The police park trooper explore and go every corner possible. I saw it before. Plus, if you hide yourself too much, can be dangerous, what happened if he found a bear or leopard or a venomous snakes?. So hidden in a national park... Not a good idea

 

[Fergy]

We are fortunate here in Australia we can fly in NP, hundreds of thousand acres to use, I personally cannot see any logical reasoning why you can't in your country, I could understand a Ban on the very popular areas that tourist frequent but the vast wilderness areas should be allowed access.

Just my view.