Has anybody ever flown in a national park?

[sar104]

13 pages of some of the most ridiculous and absurd arguments against flying our little unobtrusive toys in these wonderful parks. Sometimes I wonder if some of you have even visited a national park, Especially ones like Grand Canyon, Zion, Bryce Canyon, Yellowstone etc. if you ever had, you will be treated to an unending train of sightseeing helicopters and airplanes “buzzing around“. They are everywhere! I don’t see anyone complaining that they are ruining their “nature” experience. These parks are here for our enjoyment and some of us would like to enjoy them by taking some aerial pictures and video. We wouldn’t be bothering or putting anyone in danger. It’s time people stood up and pushed back against these knee-jerk rules based on nothing more then complete ignorance.

Just to be clear, there have been endless complaints about helicopters in GCNP. And personally, I've never seen any aircraft in Zion or Bryce except for search and rescue, so I think that you are exaggerating. A few drones, not flying over crowds (how do they ensure that though?), are not going to be a problem, but I know that NPS is worried about opening the floodgates. If drones in popular national park areas became as common as selfie sticks it would not just be annoying, it would be obnoxious and dangerous.

 

[DroningOn]

Just to be clear, there have been endless complaints about helicopters in GCNP. And personally, I've never seen any aircraft in Zion or Bryce except for search and rescue, so I think that you are exaggerating. A few drones, not flying over crowds (how do they ensure that though?), are not going to be a problem, but I know that NPS is worried about opening the floodgates. If drones in popular national park areas became as common as selfie sticks it would not just be annoying, it would be obnoxious and dangerous.

Not exaggerating.... I also have a house in Panguitch near Bryce. There is a heliport next to Ruby’s Inn just outside the park that run tours over Bryce and Zion. They’re so common we don’t even notice them.

Bryce Canyon Airlines | Flights to Bryce Canyon

 

[sar104]

Not exaggerating.... I also have a house in Panguitch near Bryce. There is a heliport next to Ruby’s Inn just outside the park that run tours over Bryce and Zion. They’re so common we don’t even notice them.

Bryce Canyon Airlines | Flights to Bryce Canyon

Interesting. Maybe I've just been lucky, unless they fly quite high. Still, within the parks that's a different level of nuisance and hazard than potentially dozens of toy drones buzzing around at the popular scenic locations, which is what the NPS envisages.

 

[tcope]

13 pages of some of the most ridiculous and absurd arguments against flying our little unobtrusive toys in these wonderful parks.

Like the one that someone flew into a water source at Yellowstone? That kind of "unobtrusive"? Truth is, they are not and won't be unobtrusive. If they were allowed you'd be waiting for a geyser to erupt all the while having 50 drones buzzing around.

Sometimes I wonder if some of you have even visited a national park, Especially ones like Grand Canyon, Zion, Bryce Canyon, Yellowstone etc. if you ever had, you will be treated to an unending train of sightseeing helicopters and airplanes “buzzing around“.

As with drones, the NPS service does not have any control over public airspace. So there is nothing that they can do about this. It _is_ the NPS's job to regulate people on the ground.

They are everywhere! I don’t see anyone complaining that they are ruining their “nature” experience.

I'm guessing that you have not looked into this at all. Otherwise you'd see that there are a lot of complaints.

These parks are here for our enjoyment and some of us would like to enjoy them by taking some aerial pictures and video. We wouldn’t be bothering or putting anyone in danger.

Everyone's enjoyment... not just the 1% that fly drones... and yes you would bother people.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

I simply can’t comprehend the argument here. I’ve flown in national forests, up 14,000 ft peaks, beautiful stream-land, rivers, mountain ranges, oceans, marshland, and photographed wildlife with zero regulation and restriction. All it takes is work. Yes you have to drive/fly/travel. Yes you have to hike for hours and hours in snow, rain, heat. Yes you have to put forth effort to find little known areas off forest roads and trails with little to no foot travel. Yes you have to be CREATIVE. All of these areas are overwhelmingly in excess throughout the continental Unites States. To complain about access to the most frequently visited/easily-viewed touristic natural landscape available in national parks/monuments while knowingly aware the regulations are put in place due to popular opinion against your hobby and/or to protect sensitive wildlife/landscape absolutely baffles me. In fact it seems counterproductive for drones in general. The accessible acreage and abundant scenic landscape is simply not comparable to the minuscule amount of drone restricted land. The guy above this post mentions numerous restrictions in his area of NC...how many national forests are in NC again? Four? Five? Then you have Tennessee literally right there...Chattanooga anyone? It’s all about perspective.

So I’ll give you a little perspective. The entire coastline of my state is National Seashore, from SC to Va. Hundreds of miles of uninhabited land, illegal to get a shot of even a sand dune at 25 feet off the ground.
Also, the Blue Ridge Parkway runs across the entire western part of the state, border to border, again, hundreds of miles of uninhabited land, where, many times of the day or season not another human can be seen.

Then you have the App trail which runs the entire border between NC and Tn., In the only area not occupied by the Great Smokey National Park.

Everything in between is either airspace restriction, private property, or not scenic at all.

So we’re not talking about insignificant amounts of land here.

Yes there is National Forest here which I am grateful for, but it is often marginally accessible or heavily forested and difficult to fly. But more importantly, at the rate things are going how long is that going to last?

We who do this commercially are fighting our own battles, but you strictly hobby guys who are okay with this might want to see the train coming.

 

[tcope]

So I’ll give you a little perspective. The entire coastline of my state is National Seashore, from SC to Va. Hundreds of miles of uninhabited land, illegal to get a shot of even a sand dune at 25 feet off the ground.
Also, the Blue Ridge Parkway runs across the entire western part of the state, border to border, again, hundreds of miles of uninhabited land, where, many times of the day or season not another human can be seen.

I think this is a good argument but the problem is, where would the boundaries be? They would need to be miles away from any area where people gather. They would then also have the big problem of people thinking since drones are allowed in NPS areas, they are allowed everywhere. You'd then also have the big problem of people not knowing the exact boundaries or simply trying to push those boundaries. The NPS is already stretch _really_ thin when it comes to rangers. Allowing drone flights would simply make their tasks even that more difficult. You don't need a drone to enjoy National Parks.

 

[SxSmith]

For all the people who don't like rules maybe drones aren't your thing? If you want to fly above 400 feet to thousands of feet. Over airports. In national parks, stadiums and crowds. Into forest fires, etc. Try skydiving. If you want to go to first responder scenes, jump without a parachute. The ambulance is already there.

 

[tcope]

For all the people who don't like rules maybe drones aren't your thing? If you want to fly above 400 feet to thousands of feet. Over airports. In national parks, stadiums and crowds. Into forest fires, etc. Try skydiving. If you want to go to first responder scenes, jump without a parachute. The ambulance is already there.

It's not a question about following the rules, people would not be complaining if they did not follow those rules. The issue at hand is weather or not the NPS should remove the restriction and allow drones.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

For all the people who don't like rules maybe drones aren't your thing? If you want to fly above 400 feet to thousands of feet. Over airports. In national parks, stadiums and crowds. Into forest fires, etc. Try skydiving. If you want to go to first responder scenes, jump without a parachute. The ambulance is already there.

We can still enjoy our hobby while obeying AND disliking some of the more ridiculous rules.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

Other than "It MIGHT scare an animaL... It COULD start a fire.. Someone MIGHT hear it" I've yet to hear a good reason articulated for banning millions of acres (within guidelines) of uninhabited land from small drone flight, other than "I just don't want them there, or some might push it to the limit. Using this logic, they would never get off the ground... anywhere.

Regardless of my feeling on the matter, the government shouldn't be making regulation based on lack of reason.

 

[Schnauzergeek]

Like the one that someone flew into a water source at Yellowstone? That kind of "unobtrusive"? Truth is, they are not and won't be unobtrusive. If they were allowed you'd be waiting for a geyser to erupt all the while having 50 drones buzzing around.

As with drones, the NPS service does not have any control over public airspace. So there is nothing that they can do about this. It _is_ the NPS's job to regulate people on the ground.

I'm guessing that you have not looked into this at all. Otherwise you'd see that there are a lot of complaints.

Everyone's enjoyment... not just the 1% that fly drones... and yes you would bother people.

Exactly! What amazes me is the incredible amount of “meism” on this thread. Me me me, I, we, etc. The law and posted restrictions are there for the irresponsible few that ruin it for everyone. Why is it that you can’t just enjoy natural beauty without this incessant need to capture it on your UAV and running the risk of spoiling the experience for someone else? The overwhelming responses such as “well I wouldn’t be obtrusive” or “I’d only be flying for a few minutes” or “I’d never disturb any wildlife” or my favorite “there wouldn’t be that many people flying” are so incredibly selfish to me. You want to see some aerial footage of National Parks? Buy a coffee table book and enjoy those photos shot by a professional who had the experience, equipment, technology and permission. Why is there a need to stroke your own egos just to say “I shot this while flying over Yellowstone” ?

 

[Robert Mitchell]

Exactly! What amazes me is the incredible amount of “meism” on this thread. Me me me, I, we, etc. The law and posted restrictions are there for the irresponsible few that ruin it for everyone. Why is it that you can’t just enjoy natural beauty without this incessant need to capture it on your UAV and running the risk of spoiling the experience for someone else? The overwhelming responses such as “well I wouldn’t be obtrusive” or “I’d only be flying for a few minutes” or “I’d never disturb any wildlife” or my favorite “there wouldn’t be that many people flying” are so incredibly selfish to me. You want to see some aerial footage of National Parks? Buy a coffee table book and enjoy those photos shot by a professional who had the experience, equipment, technology and permission. Why is there a need to stroke your own egos just to say “I shot this while flying over Yellowstone” ?

If you want to call wanting to be unencumbered by onerous or overreaching restriction, "Meism" or "selfish" then yeah, count me in.

And yes, I am both professional, and have the experience, just not the "permission" since I havent filled out the proper forms 90 days in advance and been anointed by a commitee.

 

[Schnauzergeek]

If you want to call wanting to be unencumbered by onerous or overreaching restriction, "Meism" or "selfish" then yeah, count me in.

And yes, I am both professional, and have the experience, just not the "permission" since I havent filled out the proper forms 90 days in advance and been anointed by a commitee.

So because you’re a professional and experienced means that you’re absolved from the rules? I have a Part 107 and I’m a professional firefighter. I see on a regular basis what happens when someone is given an inch of latitude and a mile is taken.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

So because you’re a professional and experienced means that you’re absolved from the rules? I have a Part 107 and I’m a professional firefighter. I see on a regular basis what happens when someone is given an inch of latitude and a mile is taken.

Did I ever say I am absolved from the rules? No, not once, but I can comply and still disagree with them when they are not based on anything reasonable.
As for taking a mile, yes of course some will do that no matter what the rules are. But again, they are less likely to do so if the rules are reasonable in the first place.
Not flying when there is a wildfire: Reasonable. Not flying within miles of another human being, simply because it’s within the boundaries of a NP: Unreasonable.
Will I comply? By law I don’t get to choose whether to comply, ( at least not without potential consequences) but I do get to disagree with them.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

Man, I don’t rhink the OP had any idea what a can of worms he was opening here! Lol!

 

[Mr. Salty]

Other than "It MIGHT scare an animaL... It COULD start a fire.. Someone MIGHT hear it"

Except that they HAVE frightened animals, they HAVE started fires and people DO object to the sound, especially in crowded national parks.

 

[Colberado]

We can still enjoy our hobby while obeying AND disliking some of the more ridiculous rules.

We who do this commercially are fighting our own battles, but you strictly hobby guys who are okay with this might want to see the train coming.

It was my impression that you were “commercial” as opposed to “us strictly hobby guys”? I’d argue the opposite to what you implied. That there is no train heading our (“strictly hobby guys”) way. Instead that there was already a train in your way as a so-called commercial professional. Because it’s an already saturated area and practically anyone with two thumbs and a couple grand can do it. I’d also question why I’m (as a “strictly hobby guy”) able and willing to venture to places not restricted in order to obtain footage nobody else has, yet you are not. But instead would rather use a single highly populated state on the East coast as an example of your frustration in regard to obtaining footage in national parks, of which everyone else has already seen whether it be from the ground, professional photography, and sanctioned video. Honestly, if you’re truly a commercial whatever, I think you live in the wrong part of the country. That being said, I live near numerous national parks, national momuments, and wildlife refuge yet I don’t see the need to fly in any of them. However in your case living in such areas with your stance may just cause further duress?

 

[MavicCF]

I think that if the NPS put in a system of clear-cut, well thought out rules, and were good about enforcing them, that the problem of people being irresponsible would be vastly negated.
At first I imagine it could be bad, but after the first few $200-500 fines, things would probably settle down quite a bit. -CF

 

[Fergy]

Just stay away from the populated tourist areas of NP and fly where its quiet and all will be fine with the world.

 

[black_magic100]

Just stay away from the populated tourist areas of NP and fly where its quiet and all will be fine with the world.

Complacency is never the answer. It's extremely similar to saying, "who cares if the government monitors our web activity, just don't do anything illegal so you don't have anything to hide".