"No Drone Zones" proposal in Oregon

[Hydrostan]

Oregon asks for comment on plans for ‘no drone zones’ at state parks, Oregon Coast

Maps that establish “no drone zones” at state parks and on the Coast would be created under a plan from the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department.

finance.yahoo.com

 

[eEridani]

Too bad they didn't include the proposed rules Parks and Rec are considering.

 

[DoomMeister]

As long as they provide a safe place to launch and land within VLOS of these most scenic areas that would be fine. If they make it impossible to fly there legally then there will be a major problem.

As far as noise goes this is the biggest farce in all of these NFZ’s at parks and scenic areas. Many request a manned aircraft to be at least 2000’ AGL when overflying the area for noise abatement. Even single engine aircraft at that altitude are many times louder than a drone at 100’ AGL.

Others say a drone interferes with the scenic beauty, but never complain when a plane or helicopter fly through the same scenic vista.

I just get truly frustrated with lawmakers bowing down to all the anti-drone crowd. There are already regulations on the books to take care of some of the issues they are wanting to create NFZ’s for. If they would prosecute those that break the current regulations then more laws to restrict responsible drone operators would not be necessary. Making more laws instead of having a spine and prosecuting those that break current regulations is not the cure to the problem.

 

[ScottTX]

“The proposed rules are intended to provide clarity for drone pilots, hobbyists and the general public to know where drone take-off and landing is allowed and prohibited within a state park and along the ocean shore,” the agency said in a news release."

At least they understand that they don't own the airspace.

In Colorado, there are only (2) State Parks where you can fly - Chatfield & Cherry Creek.

I'm driving to CO on Saturday to stay with my best friend. He lives just a few miles from Chatfield.

 

[DoomMeister]

“The proposed rules are intended to provide clarity for drone pilots, hobbyists and the general public to know where drone take-off and landing is allowed and prohibited within a state park and along the ocean shore,” the agency said in a news release."

At least they understand that they don't own the airspace.

In Colorado, there are only (2) State Parks where you can fly - Chatfield & Cherry Creek.

I'm driving to CO on Saturday to stay with my best friend. He lives just a few miles from Chatfield.

I well remember Cherry Creek. The wife and I spent many weekends there while stationed at Lowry AFB.

 

[Nanny Ogg]

As long as they provide a safe place to launch and land within VLOS of these most scenic areas that would be fine. If they make it impossible to fly there legally then there will be a major problem.

As far as noise goes this is the biggest farce in all of these NFZ’s at parks and scenic areas. Many request a manned aircraft to be at least 2000’ AGL when overflying the area for noise abatement. Even single engine aircraft at that altitude are many times louder than a drone at 100’ AGL.

Others say a drone interferes with the scenic beauty, but never complain when a plane or helicopter fly through the same scenic vista.

I just get truly frustrated with lawmakers bowing down to all the anti-drone crowd. There are already regulations on the books to take care of some of the issues they are wanting to create NFZ’s for. If they would prosecute those that break the current regulations then more laws to restrict responsible drone operators would not be necessary. Making more laws instead of having a spine and prosecuting those that break current regulations is not the cure to the problem.

Maybe it would be simpler if they banned drones anywhere snowmobiles and Harley Davidson motorcycles are banned.

 

[db4476]

Oregon asks for comment on plans for ‘no drone zones’ at state parks, Oregon Coast

Maps that establish “no drone zones” at state parks and on the Coast would be created under a plan from the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department.

finance.yahoo.com

I'll ask that all interested parties comment on the proposed rules by following this link: Scroll down to comment

A link to the proposed rules: Proposed Rules

To read comments already submitted: Public comments part 1 and more comments here: comments part 2

Much is at stake here for the drone community, it would help our community by commenting if you can.


Cheers!

 

[HoozierDroneDaddy]

I well remember Cherry Creek. The wife and I spent many weekends there while stationed at Lowry AFB.

When were you at Lowry?

 

[dronerdave]

There are only a few reasons I would not want a drone around in a public park. One is if the drone operator lets their drone get in the way of my photographic opportunity of a subject, and that being capturing a person or landscape I'd like to shoot provided I could normally get that type of drone free image/video. When people jump fences or boundaries to capture a better handheld photograph by breaking park rules and they are in my way it bothers me and consider it selfish. A picture of Half Dome just sucks if there is a drone in the way... well most of the time. Another is a disrespectful drone pilot operating in a manner that annoys me. For instance a noisy drone hovering over me doing the same thing I'm doing (photography) wouldn't bother me, but if I'm in a quiet area away from the normal human noise, a drone buzzing around me would not make my day. If I'm on a roadway, I wouldn't expect silence from normal traffic, so a drone wouldn't bother me in most circumstances. Too bad some people just have to see a drone to go off when it really doesn't affect them in any way other than being there.

When I sit around a campfire at night in a public park, I might listen to music but keep it low enough so as not to bother other local campers/people.

We don't have a right to fly...only a privilege to do so and we need to be good stewards to promote future rulings in our favor. I won't say there aren't other pro or con reasons, but I'm not generally entitlement orientated. Just ME in most circumstances I hope

 

[eEridani]

Those new rules don't really sound onerous. The issue I have with them is that it appears - I may be misreading - the decision to exclude drones from a given park is given to a single person who can do so without any public input. So every park superintendent can simply say no drones and it is law.