NFZ Question

[Simone L]

Recently a recreational flyer posted a video done in a national park in the USA. I commented that this is a NFZ. She said she could take off and land outside the park but fly in their airspace even if it was a NFZ because they cannot control the airspace. . I disagreed. A friend of hers who ‘knows the rules’ said she was right. I took the 107 exam recently and everything I read and understood said it is illegal to fly within a national park.
I don’t claim to be an expert but m now doubting my understanding of the rules. Can someone please clarify? Thanks!!

 

[BigAl07]

The NPS controls the LAND and not the air. If there are no other "Airspace Restrictions" in place (TFR etc) and you're not standing ON actual NPS land (or land they manage) you CAN fly over NPS land so long as you are following ALL other UAS rules (airspace, Line of Sight, not over people). Keep in mind you could be violating some local ordinances such as reckless behavior etc.

Also if the aircraft goes down on NPS land you may be in trouble trying to get it back as you're probably going to be trespassing or something like that.

 

[Thomas B]

Also note that if the area is a designated wilderness the minimum altitude is 2000’ AGL.

 

[Simone L]

The NPS controls the LAND and not the air. If there are no other "Airspace Restrictions" in place (TFR etc) and you're not standing ON actual NPS land (or land they manage) you CAN fly over NPS land so long as you are following ALL other UAS rules (airspace, Line of Sight, not over people). Keep in mind you could be violating some local ordinances such as reckless behavior etc.

Also if the aircraft goes down on NPS land you may be in trouble trying to get it back as you're probably going to be trespassing or something like that.

Thank you!!

 

[brett8883]

Also note that if the area is a designated wilderness the minimum altitude is 2000’ AGL.

SOME designated wilderness areas have a requirement of a minimum 2000 feet but not many and certainly not most.

In MOST wilderness areas it is “requested” to stay above 2000 feet, not required. If it was required there wouldn’t be anywhere to fly to fly in Utah or Arizona for that matter.

 

[Thomas B]

SOME designated wilderness areas have a requirement of a minimum 2000 feet but not many and certainly not most.

In MOST wilderness areas it is “requested” to stay above 2000 feet, not required. If it was required there wouldn’t be anywhere to fly to fly in Utah or Arizona for that matter.
View attachment 113493

Check out the NFS website. I believe it says different than sky vector.

plenty of places to fly in AZ... most of it is National Forest. You do have to avoid designated recreation areas too... so just leaves several thousand square miles

 

[brett8883]

Check out the NFS website. I believe it says different than sky vector.

First of all sky vector is the aeronautical charts from the FAA. Only the FAA controls airspace. The NFS doesn’t have authority to regulate airspace.

Nevertheless I did check their website and it says the same thing I said.

“What is the U.S. Forest Service stance or regulations regarding hobbyist drones? Where is it OK to fly them? Where not? Why?
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has regulatory authority over ALL airspace, including recreational use of airspace by model aircraft, which is covered by FAA Advisory Circular 91-57. The U.S. Forest Service does not have the authority to establish any additional regulations regarding where a UAS can or can’t be flown. However, recreational UAS must abide by Temporary Flight Restrictions (TFRs) in place by the FAA over disasters such as wildfires. The FAA also has an advisory (AIM Section 4, 7-4-6) with suggested limitations for flight over Wilderness areas. Unmanned Aircraft must abide with specifications identified through the FAA's Certificate of Authorization process which includes no flight over populated areas.”

(Unmanned Aircraft Systems FAQs | US Forest Service)

plenty of places to fly in AZ... most of it is National Forest.

Well that’s good. In Utah the National Forest the road access is lined by Wilderness area so if you want to get to non-wilderness you have to hike to it usually over impassable mountains. I was told it is the same way in Arizona’s National Forest but maybe I was given bad info.

You do have to avoid designated recreation areas too

Says who? Where are you getting this information?? Designated recreation areas are like the best place to fly

 

[Deleted member 114292]

Recently a recreational flyer posted a video done in a national park in the USA. I commented that this is a NFZ. She said she could take off and land outside the park but fly in their airspace even if it was a NFZ because they cannot control the airspace. . I disagreed. A friend of hers who ‘knows the rules’ said she was right. I took the 107 exam recently and everything I read and understood said it is illegal to fly within a national park.
I don’t claim to be an expert but m now doubting my understanding of the rules. Can someone please clarify? Thanks!!

Where in the FAA tests or in your studies for it did the term NFZ , Occur.
I would think you would understand the proper terminology. There’s regulated air space no tams and TFRs.

So in any event it’s certainly not an NFZ. It’s a meaningless term unless you’re in a conflict region. It also makes it difficult to help people when they use this term.

 

[Vic Moss]

Also note that if the area is a designated wilderness the minimum altitude is 2000’ AGL.

Actually, the 2000' minimum is a suggested minimum.

 

[Vic Moss]

Where in the FAA tests or in your studies for it did the term NFZ , Occur.
I would think you would understand the proper terminology. There’s regulated air space no tams and TFRs.

So in any event it’s certainly not an NFZ. It’s a meaningless term unless you’re in a conflict region. It also makes it difficult to help people when they use this term.

NFZ is an excepted generic term. While it can create some confusion, it's used all the time. Including in many of my discussions with the FAA.

 

[theDRONEranger]

While there are NO FAA restrictions for flyover of NPS property, the NPS enforce strictly on their POLICY. Violators (caught) may be subject to legal fines and penalties via charges of wildlife harassment and others. While there are no FAA prohibitions stopping the flyover’s, the issue becomes a severe matter for the NPS on wildlife harassment. That is where they get you. Even the helicopters in the Grand Canyon are limited to specific altitudes and vectors to prevent disturbance of canyon wildlife. The 2000 foot altitude is suggested to help ensure a separation of noise (from the aircraft) and wildlife.

Some info was garnered from the NPS.gov

 

[Deleted member 114292]

NFZ is an excepted generic term. While it can create some confusion, it's used all the time. Including in many of my discussions with the FAA.

well my point is really when you talk about an NFZ with no further qualifications it's hard to know how to answer.
Because it's too generic.

 

[brett8883]

While there are NO FAA restrictions for flyover of NPS property, the NPS enforce strictly on their POLICY. Violators (caught) may be subject to legal fines and penalties via charges of wildlife harassment and others. While there are no FAA prohibitions stopping the flyover’s, the issue becomes a severe matter for the NPS on wildlife harassment. That is where they get you. Even the helicopters in the Grand Canyon are limited to specific altitudes and vectors to prevent disturbance of canyon wildlife. The 2000 foot altitude is suggested to help ensure a separation of noise (from the aircraft) and wildlife.

Some info was garnered from the NPS.gov

Note that the one over the Grand Canyon IS one of those places that have special flight rules. That one is complex so I won’t get into it but it does not follow the regular 2,000 ft suggestion.

 

[lookout]

Note that the one over the Grand Canyon IS one of those places that have special flight rules. That one is complex so I won’t get into it but it does not follow the regular 2,000 ft suggestion.

Nice place to catch some turbulence.

 

[theDRONEranger]

Nice place to catch some turbulence.

We were on a semi-western tour of the US in Jan/Feb 2018. We had the wife's brother and sis-in-law from Korea with us. Start was COS, CO. First was the Mt Rushmore, just in time for govt shut down. Then, the Devil's Tower, looked for UFO but no encounters of any kind, so . . . all the way to the west side of WY to Every Which Way But Loose land, but Clint was NOT there. So we did a winter tour of Yellowstone NP. From there, down to Cheyenne for RoN, then back to Colorado Springs. One week later south to the Painted Desert/Petrified Forest. What forest, it was just a bunch of rocks looking like old trees. Very pretty the way the sun reflected off the petrified trees. Painted Desert was beautiful as well. On to the Big Ditch. I surprised the other three with a helo tour of the Grand Canyon on day 2. The next day on the drive to Vegas, we heard on the radio of a helo crash in the Canyon, 3 or 4 dead including pilot, foreigners on honeymoon. Exact same company and exact same helo model as we had. Only diff was based in LV not at the Canyon. We stopped and did the dam tour. Surprisingly the water level is wayyy down. 2x days in LV, yeah baby!! We come out ahead on the tables. We don't gamble so we just passed them by. Onward to SLC and the Bonneville Salt Flats, then back down to Arches, RoN and then back through the Rockies via Glenwood Springs for hot water soak. Den to COS, CO. DONE! NPS after NPS after NPS! The drones stayed in their cases. Bummer!