Has anybody ever flown in a national park?

[black_magic100]

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.

Amen.

 

[WTFoxtrot]

Even if there are no humans around aren't you going to disturb the peace of the animals?

YES!

NPS's mission is to “conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and wildlife therein, and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.”

I have seen wild hogs, deer, vultures and turkeys on our own property get really upset when I fly in their vicinity - especially with the Platinum. You really have no idea how any of the different species inhabiting the parks are going to react to the noise and you could be flying right over a nesting area, leaving them threatened and perhaps prone to leave the protection of the parks. The whole point is to preserve - not to provide a place for people to fly their expensive toys.

 

[black_magic100]

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

Yea I probably won't do it. I'm getting my 107 here shortly so not worth the risk. Just bought a Panasonic g85 since I can't use my drone lol

 

[bushie]

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.

Unfortunatly not in WA

 

[Mr. Salty]

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.

That isn't universal in Australia's national parks and there are a LOT of requirements, restricts, and outright bans:

Can I Fly My Drone In National Parks In Australia? | ReefFree

I also suspect that most of Australia's NPs aren't as heavily trafficked as most of the parks in the U.S.

 

[Tinmania]

I also suspect that most of Australia's NPs aren't as heavily trafficked as most of the parks in the U.S.

Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Grand Canyon are not "most." Moreover, there are huge areas in even those NPs that have very few visitors.



Mike

 

[Robert Mitchell]

For all you who are fine with the total NPS ban:


Most of us here are not asking for unlimited, no holds barred access to all parts of the National Parks, simply reasonable guidelines as to where we can be permitted.


If you take into account that every day more and more states, counties, cities, State Parks, and private property is being deemed off limits, in the US. Not to mention the already illegal airspace near (obviously), airports, sports stadiums, prisons, critical infrastructure, military bases etc...


Once the states and counties are done with their private property limitations, just where do you think you are going to be able to fly in the future? You might well be stuck with flying in a football field in a remote area, or on a shelf if this trend continues, We, who are commercial operators can still have access to most areas by law, but congress is taking a hard look at the hobby fliers as I write this.


So, here we have millions of acres of PUBLIC land, the vast majority of where no animal or human would be disturbed, and you are ok with the complete exclusion of UAVs. Rangers themselves have expressed dismay that UAVs cannot even be used for SAR or beneficial research due to the present, non bending rule.


I suggest you might want to consider what you are advocating for, for your hobby.

 

[nikkolaa]

I never understood this. Unless you are legit flying your drone in front a bears face to the point where you are about to hit it I don't see the issue. In my experience, 99% of animals don't seem to mind drones at a reasonable distance. To them it's probably just a weird looking bird, lol.

I would argue that humans walking through trails are significantly more stressful to wildlife as they can't determine if you are a threat or not thus we should ban humans from walking on the trails and instead force people to enjoy the wildlife via a drone because it's much safer and less stressful.

The point I'm trying to make is that it seems extremely odd that they would ban drones in a place where drones were literally made to explore. The more the FAA restricts locations the less people are going to care and start disregarding the rules.

I like to consider myself a very responsible pilot, but it sucks when the FAA bans places just to ban them. [emoji25]

Hi,

From my past experience in South Africa, AND having been approved for flight by the owner of a private gamereserve, I can attest that :

- wild animals become completely mad about it, sadly..
As the common reply to something they do not know, I disagree with you, they will change behavior, and at least start going away..
And the min altitude to avoid this would be so high that become useless.. You need to integrate that the ambient is generally kinda "quiet",, unless they would be somewhere else..
Thanks to that, I had great video chasing impala, antilopes, horses and small buffalo

- this statement is true only for animals low in the food chain.. It's another world with predators.
I had the chance to see lions in this park, and well, the least to say is they emerged very quickly from the forest and start tracking it by eyes and follow it on ground.
The important to notice is they were fenced, of course..

A simple explanation, given by the owner during the visit we had prior to my flight : he showed us an good experience about what happened, and how to behave, when encountering lions closely (he meant too much close..).

Two lions behind fencing, 2 meters away from our group of five people.
One is asked to walk for 10meters away from us, along the fence. - both lions looked at him but stayed close to us.

Another is asked to do the same, but running this time.. Well, something different happened! Both lions started immediately to chase him along the fence and stayed there, keeping him VLOS, even if monitoring us at the same time..

-> A predator always searches to confirm its position in food chain (in this case we're dealing with the leader..), so it will be very attentive to any hints, behavior, response that will help it to confirm he's higher

Back at the drone.., it was something that triggered their curiosity surely.
But they did not know nothing about it, first encounter, so maybe they thought "what a noisy bird", or "get down a bit so I'll try to see if you'd resist to sollicitation I have the secret of",

Anyway, the rule of not flying, at all, drone in South African national parks (where you are inside fencing WITH the animals, this time) is totally legitimate..

I can't even imagine the consequences if I would have fly this afternoon of safari with private 4wd, when I saw vultures circling around some point, not so far away from me.. It was for sure for some dead animal, and potentially all the predators fighting for it (vultures are just waiting for its turn, the last..), all we did not had the chance to see..

The video would have been crazy, but if they chose to track and follow it on my way back, best case would be I can't take the drone after landing because I just can't fight hyena or lion, worst they attack the car and we can't drive away..
And there's prison for you if you'd survive, because it's clear you were trespassing the law with all these plastic proofs all over the ground.. Not even thinking about WWF that will sue you for intoxicating wild animals with lipo chemical components!!

Sorry too long contribution!!
Nicolas

 

[Robert Mitchell]

Hi,

From my past experience in South Africa, AND having been approved for flight by the owner of a private gamereserve, I can attest that :

- wild animals become completely mad about it, sadly..
As the common reply to something they do not know, I disagree with you, they will change behavior, and at least start going away..
And the min altitude to avoid this would be so high that become useless.. You need to integrate that the ambient is generally kinda "quiet",, unless they would be somewhere else..
Thanks to that, I had great video chasing impala, antilopes, horses and small buffalo

- this statement is true only for animals low in the food chain.. It's another world with predators.
I had the chance to see lions in this park, and well, the least to say is they emerged very quickly from the forest and start tracking it by eyes and follow it on ground.
The important to notice is they were fenced, of course..

A simple explanation, given by the owner during the visit we had prior to my flight : he showed us an good experience about what happened, and how to behave, when encountering lions closely (he meant too much close..).

Two lions behind fencing, 2 meters away from our group of five people.
One is asked to walk for 10meters away from us, along the fence. - both lions looked at him but stayed close to us.

Another is asked to do the same, but running this time.. Well, something different happened! Both lions started immediately to chase him along the fence and stayed there, keeping him VLOS, even if monitoring us at the same time..

-> A predator always searches to confirm its position in food chain (in this case we're dealing with the leader..), so it will be very attentive to any hints, behavior, response that will help it to confirm he's higher

Back at the drone.., it was something that triggered their curiosity surely.
But they did not know nothing about it, first encounter, so maybe they thought "what a noisy bird", or "get down a bit so I'll try to see if you'd resist to sollicitation I have the secret of",

Anyway, the rule of not flying, at all, drone in South African national parks (where you are inside fencing WITH the animals, this time) is totally legitimate..

I can't even imagine the consequences if I would have fly this afternoon of safari with private 4wd, when I saw vultures circling around some point, not so far away from me.. It was for sure for some dead animal, and potentially all the predators fighting for it (vultures are just waiting for its turn, the last..), all we did not had the chance to see..

The video would have been crazy, but if they chose to track and follow it on my way back, best case would be I can't take the drone after landing because I just can't fight hyena or lion, worst they attack the car and we can't drive away..
And there's prison for you if you'd survive, because it's clear you were trespassing the law with all these plastic proofs all over the ground.. Not even thinking about WWF that will sue you for intoxicating wild animals with lipo chemical components!!

Sorry too long contribution!!
Nicolas

I get what you're saying about animals might be influenced somewhat by a low flying drone but are you saying it has LASTING effects which they don't quickly recover from?

But at any rate, using this as the reason for the NPS ban, shouldn't ALL remote land in the US be off limits for drones, to protect the animal's feelings, not just NPS land?

If you take that concern to the extreme, considering other restrictions due to airspace, infrastructure, private property concerns etc, there will be virtually no place left to fly UAVs, and it would have a profound effect on the beneficial aspects of this technology.

Sometimes, here in the US, UAVs are prevented by onerous and unbending laws from use, to help the very animals you are concerned about.

 

[Mr. Salty]

Rangers themselves have expressed dismay that UAVs cannot even be used for SAR or beneficial research due to the present, non bending rule.

Except that the National Park Service DOES use drones for search and rescue, scientific research and other things: Unmanned Aircraft in the National Parks (U.S. National Park Service)

 

[Robert Mitchell]

Except that the National Park Service DOES use drones for search and rescue, scientific research and other things: Unmanned Aircraft in the National Parks (U.S. National Park Service)

Have you ever dealt with governmet bureauracry? You must live in a fantasy land if you think you’d get permission in time to do any good.

Does the National Park Service use unmanned aircraft?
The National Park Service uses unmanned aircraft for administrative purposes when appropriate and approved by the director of the region in which the park is located.These purposes may include search and rescue operations, fire operations, scientific study, and aerial photography.

I’ve talked to rangers who say it takes an act of Congress. Don’t kid yourself by reading the public line.

 

[Mr. Salty]

I’ve talked to rangers who say it takes an act of Congress. Don’t kid yourself by reading the public line.

I guess you can just make up whatever "facts" you want to to suit your argument.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

Except that the National Park Service DOES use drones for search and rescue, scientific research and other things: Unmanned Aircraft in the National Parks (U.S. National Park Service)

And given the fact that they themselves, (and most reasonable people, yourself seemingly excluded) imply that UAVs have a definite role, as per their original document in 2014, wouldn’t it be better to not have a ban, have reasonable restrictions, and then punish those who violate existing standards?

Many like yourself just seem to have an “all or nothing” approach.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

I guess you can just make up whatever "facts" you want to to suit your argument.

Ok,Salty. Go ask one for yourself, if you think I’m making it up.

You get your facts through what the media and government tells you, and I’ll take my facts from real life,

 

[nikkolaa]

I get what you're saying about animals might be influenced somewhat by a low flying drone but are you saying it has LASTING effects which they don't quickly recover from?

But at any rate, using this as the reason for the NPS ban, shouldn't ALL remote land in the US be off limits for drones, to protect the animal's feelings, not just NPS land?

If you take that concern to the extreme, considering other restrictions due to airspace, infrastructure, private property concerns etc, there will be virtually no place left to fly UAVs, and it would have a profound effect on the beneficial aspects of this technology.

Sometimes, here in the US, UAVs are prevented by onerous and unbending laws from use, to help the very animals you are concerned about.

Well, I'm not sure if lasting effects are identified so far, but I would say that in case of wild animals, they would at least have some past experience with it if another guy later does the same..
Maybe they won't be scared the same way, or wondering so much what is it.. Maybe they will just not care about it, as classified harmless, or untouchable? Who knows?

What about eagles encounters, where the drone was clearly disturbing it when close to the nest? I do believe also that if they found this place to be quiet and without predators for their kids, having a drone in vicinity could result in leaving the nest as is, it depends of the species..

Though there are animals who do not care at all, like snakes, they're deaf!!

Besides, I do think US likes to "law" anything, mostly to prevent further diverging attitude, like this day in a bar where it was stipulated as forbidden to pee in the sink.. Well, common sense, but if there's a law, there is probably already someone who claimed it was not forbidden.. Or they just prevent it from happening even before someone thinks about doing it..

That seems to be the logic of NP in most of the countries all around the world..

Preventing fly so no evaluation to perform about its impact?

Imagine if this park is struggling with subvention and then one guy showed up and asks "what about the impact of your visitors with drone?"

In this case I would also join the thought that, what about this guy with his Harley?? Also true..

Blurred lines hmm

 

[Mossiback]

...The real reason drones are banned is because they can be really annoying and the general public doesn’t want them there, period...

I think this is correct. I believe that for the most part, the general public is ignorant about drones/quads. Their opinions are based more on news reports than on experience and the news does not report on the majority of operators that follow the rules.

And for the "no one else is around" crowd, in a forested area you cannot tell if someone is around the next bend.

 

[Mr. Salty]

And given the fact that they themselves, (and most reasonable people, yourself seemingly excluded) imply that UAVs have a definite role, as per their original document in 2014, wouldn’t it be better to not have a ban, have reasonable restrictions, and then punish those who violate existing standards?

Many like yourself just seem to have an “all or nothing” approach.

OK, here's the common ground: I'm OK with drones being used by qualified personnel with the appropriate permits to use drones for search and rescue, and for legitimate scientific research. I'm not for unsupervised people like the OP who just want to take them on vacation and fly them wherever they want when they want to get "badass photos" where they're going to disturb other people and wildlife.

 

[black_magic100]

OK, here's the common ground: I'm OK with drones being used by qualified personnel with the appropriate permits to use drones for search and rescue, and for legitimate scientific research. I'm not for unsupervised people like the OP who just want to take them on vacation and fly them wherever they want when they want to get "badass photos" where they're going to disturb other people and wildlife.

I mean I don't really enjoy going on hikes when there are thousands of other tourists around so while we are at it why don't we just ban humans from walking the trails because all humans want to do is see "badass views". I think NPS should ban people from walking the trails and the only people who should be able to walk the trails are those with permits. /s

Seriously man, you are on a forum of a drone that is primarily used for recreation.

As others have mentioned, I'm not so concerned with the idea of national parks being off limits, but more so the route the gov't is taking. At this rate, my $1000 drone is going to be a $0 paper weight... Why do you want that?

 

[AngryGardener]

In Canada the current restrictions are so tight I just assume every flight is breaking the rules. Making rules so restrictive they effectively ban the activity will result in individuals making choices.

I chose to follow rules when they are sound and make sense. In fact sometimes I will even refuse to fly when allowed because I perceive there to be safety issues, public disturbance issues or other issues that I choose to respect. I’m going to add risk of causing forest fires to the list.

I also choose to “break” restricted areas occasionally, provided legitimate concerns and risks are very low. It’s like skateboarding, or smoking weed, or jay walking, speeding or turning in that good neighbor who may not have all their citizen paperwork in order. Every day millions of good, law abiding, tax paying people make similar choices.

The saying is, “Respect the intent of the “law” if not the full letter of the law.”

So, yes I will fly where I’m not supposed to fly including remote areas of remote National Parks provided it is safe and I’m not going to trigger complaints (If a tree falls and no one is there to hear it....), and there is little to no chance of getting caught. If something does happen, well, I made that choice so I accept the consequences.

As they say, don’t do the crime if you can’t...

 

[Schnauzergeek]

So you can spend your time and enjoy yourself but it bothers you to allow someone else to enjoy with their drone in a national park? Sounds like a perfect selfish.

All it takes is drones crashing into Mt. Rushmore or the sides of the Grand Canyon, crashed drones hanging from branches of Redwoods or Sequoias, etc. to screw up the natural beauty of the parks. Drone operators wanting to get that “money shot” and risk damaging the landscape to brag and impress their buddies are actually the real selfish ones. Let’s take into consideration the thousands of tourists who would prefer to enjoy the natural beauty of our parks without that annoying buzz of drones all over the place!