DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Has anybody ever flown in a national park?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I posted a link earlier in this thread detailing the restrictions on flying drones in Australia's national parks.


It varies from state to state. In Queensland I understand their is little restriction while here in WA they are effectivly banned ( You ca n in theory get permission but in practise it is difficult)

SA bans them i understand. Not sure on others.

Having said that in WA rangers will turn a blind eye unless someone complains so if you are careful and stick to CASA regs you are OK.
 
We'll just have to disagree on that one, but my point remains. If they are using that as the reasoning, they are being hypocritical by ignoring the other.

I think everyone knows that drones could be integrated safely and with little impact, if they simply took the time and effort to do so.
So Harleys, cruising right through the middle of The Great Smokey's, or snowmobiles cruising through Yellowstone, disturb animals less than a 1.5 lb drone?

Have to disagree with you on this. Harley’s obviously stay on paved roads which are few in number in national parks. Snowmobiles are only permitted in designated areas. Drones however may, as they did previously, traverse the entirety of the park. Drones may also spot wildlife from elevation, encroach on wildlife space out of their LOS, easily chase whichever wildlife of your choosing regardless of terrain/foliage/obstruction...the list goes on. My point is that your Harley/snowmobile example is very superficial. So as an answer to your rhetorical question...yes drones have infinitely more potential to disturb wildlife over snowmobiles and Harley’s.
 
Last edited:
I fly in a national Forest a lot. Rangers have even came over and watched when I was flying down the river.
 
  • Like
Reactions: badaxed
Unmanned Aircraft Systems | US Forest Service

I found this but stopped by the ranger station and talked to one of the rangers just to be sure. His answer was just act like I'm flying over my my kids lol and take no chances. So basically as long as I'm not over rafters and others no problem.
Great to know this, I thought national forest was in the same level of policy as national parks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huge Bama Fan
Have to disagree with you on this. Harley’s obviously stay on paved roads which are few in number in national parks. Snowmobiles are only permitted in designated areas. Drones however may, as they did previously, traverse the entirety of the park. Drones may also spot wildlife from elevation, encroach on wildlife space out of their LOS, easily chase whichever wildlife of your choosing regardless of terrain/foliage/obstruction...the list goes on. My point is that your Harley/snowmobile example is very superficial. So as an answer to your rhetorical question...yes drones have infinitely more potential to disturb wildlife over snowmobiles and Harley’s.
Do you have proof that drones cause any type of long-term damage to an animal? The easy solution here is to just restrict people from flying to close to animals, if they disobey it throw a large fine at them. The same people who disrespect animals are the same ones who fly in NPs right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bushie
Got news for you. All it has done is turn a lot of otherwise law abiding citizens into law breakers. If you don't believe me, go to Youtube.
That is what all laws do. There are laws against killing other people. This creates people who murder other people. Speed limits create people who speed.

There are not a lot of YT videos of people flying illegally in NP. A few, yes. There are a lot of YT videos showing people breaking all kinds of laws. This does not mean we should get rid of those laws.
 
Do you have proof that drones cause any type of long-term damage to an animal? The easy solution here is to just restrict people from flying to close to animals, if they disobey it throw a large fine at them. The same people who disrespect animals are the same ones who fly in NPs right now.

Do I need proof? Short-term or long-term, the fact remains it is infinitely possible. But for an example, yes there can be several levels of endangerment to herding elk and disturbing peregrine falcon nests. Your solution is not practical, park staff are not capable of monitoring every drone operator, much less every group of wildlife. As another mentioned-if they sanctioned one section of NP’s for drones, operators would be just as unhappy with it and of course push the boundaries with range. NP’s are usually NP’s for a reason. I will never understand the drone argument for it when we have 4 times the amount of acreage of National Forest land to fly in.
 
Do I need proof? Short-term or long-term, the fact remains it is infinitely possible. But for an example, yes there can be several levels of endangerment to herding elk and disturbing peregrine falcon nests. Your solution is not practical, park staff are not capable of monitoring every drone operator, much less every group of wildlife. As another mentioned-if they sanctioned one section of NP’s for drones, operators would be just as unhappy with it and of course push the boundaries with range. NP’s are usually NP’s for a reason. I will never understand the drone argument for it when we have 4 times the amount of acreage of National Forest land to fly in.
A simple sign at the entrance of each trail stating the rules of UAV use along with the punishments would probably scare 99% of people who would consider doing something stupid. The people who fly in NPs I am assuming are those that plead ignorance. It's a lot harder to do that when the rules are shoved in your face.
 
A simple sign at the entrance of each trail stating the rules of UAV use along with the punishments would probably scare 99% of people who would consider doing something stupid. The people who fly in NPs I am assuming are those that plead ignorance. It's a lot harder to do that when the rules are shoved in your face.

At some point I’m sure they’ll try to accommodate drones in one way or another. I personally think they should attempt to discriminate between national parks. For example, there should be no drones permitted in Yellowstone or Rocky Mountain National for obvious reasons. However other parks that are simply designated for antiquity could possibly be drone regulated without disturbing the environment.
 
That is what all laws do. There are laws against killing other people. This creates people who murder other people...
I’m assuming you didn’t really mean to say that...
Anyway, since we are getting into whether we need more laws or less laws, (and you have made it clear where you stand on that one) there isn’t a whole lot more to be said.

I happen to believe we have more than enough laws already, and the existing ones (minus the ban) would more than suffice to take care of any problem caused by a small drone.
 
no flying in national parks because of the phantom operator that crashed into old faithful in Yellowstone. Stupid people messing it up for everyone else. Prepare to pay the fine if you do it. Heaven forbid you crash, puncture the Lipo, start a forrest fire and spend time in prison for arson. Whoops.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schnauzergeek
no flying in national parks because of the phantom operator that crashed into old faithful in Yellowstone. Stupid people messing it up for everyone else. Prepare to pay the fine if you do it. Heaven forbid you crash, puncture the Lipo, start a forrest fire and spend time in prison for arson. Whoops.
Actually, it was the Grand Prismatic Spring (not Old Faithful). But yes, this is what prompted the policy.
 
I’m assuming you didn’t really mean to say that...
That is what I meant. It was in response to your post that laws only create law breakers from otherwise law abiding citizens. Yes my statement does not make a lot of sense. It's because stating laws only make law abiding citizens break the law does not make any sense. Again, that is what laws do.


Anyway, since we are getting into whether we need more laws or less laws, (and you have made it clear where you stand on that one) there isn’t a whole lot more to be said.
I'm certainly not for more laws. I'm for appropriate laws only when needed. I don't have an issue with banning drones in NP and, while I don't think they need to be banned in every location within a NP, I see the rational behind it.

Last year I flew my drone at a bridge in Hite, UT. Take a look at a map for that one. It's seriously in the middle of nowhere. Turns out, because the Colorado river is there, it's labeled as a National Recreation Area (Glen Canyon National Recreation Area). National Recreation Areas are administered by.... the NPS. As such, no drones can be flown in those areas. This is 125,000,000 acers of land! Do I think drones are going to be an issue in 99% of this area? Nope.

Now I'll even argue against myself. Ask me if I'd fly again in the middle of nowhere, such as Hite. I might, to be honest. I'd consider that the same as flying beyond VLOS. I don't see this as the same as flying in the middle of a National Park. If I'm found out, I'd expect a citation and not have an issue with that. I'm not going to sit here and say that all laws are equal. Jaywalking in a small town of 100 people with no cars on the road is not the same as jaywalking in downtown New York. It's still just as illegal.

What I don't have an issue with is the banning of drones in National Parks nor the way that the NPS has implemented the ban.
 
The issue is most people try to fly them where most people are rather then where noone is around. And it is disruptive. You would not be able to visit a park destination during season without drones flying around everywhere. I for the most part am put off by restrictions but i see why this one is there. I have flown in many NP but have never taken off in one. And I dont do it in the tourist areas, it is just not responsible or respectful to do so. And some times it turns out there is no responsible or respectful or lawful way to fly in the area you want to record.
Also if your drone crashes or has to land in the NP for any reason it is breaking the law. so be careful.
 
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.

Well if you ever in South Africa I would advise you consider two things:

Fly a drone over a National Park and your drone will be confiscated plus a huge fine. Drones are used by poachers and our wildlife is being decimated.

Extensive use of low flying aircraft and military drones is used in the fight against poaching. Flying a drone in a NP here has potential for disaster.

So it has merit here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Colberado
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,585
Messages
1,554,103
Members
159,586
Latest member
DoubleBarS