State and National Parks No Fly Zone

[sar104]

I also know that I have to keep the drone in line of sight and don't think I could do that from the distance I would have to be to get the shoreline pictures I wanted.

Sure - if you want to discuss a completely different issue then that's true. But you posted a completely untrue assertion, and it might be more edifying if you at least acknowledged that.

 

[sar104]

I think it is childish to NOT consider National parks an NFZ. also, having a part 107 doesnt teach you ANYTHING that should make you feel better about flying at a NP.
The parks CANNOT control airspace, or what is done outside of their margins. It would be different if they could.
But you would have to be a complete idiot to not understand the parks wishes when it comes to drones. And finding workarounds doesnt make you look smarter, or better at all.

I'm curious - would you extend that courtesy to all land owners?

 

[BlueDon]

Not that this topic has been beat to death in many prior threads and not that posting here is going to change a single thing but....

Drones are not allowed to be operated in NP for _several_ reasons... harassing wildlife is only one of those reasons. You ask what harassment will take place at 50 or 100 feet? You may not know this but... drones can (and are) flown lower than that. They _only_ way your argument works if they cannot. So obviously your point is.... pointless. It is not like anyone would ever use a drone to harass wildlife, right? When I search on Youtube, this is the 4th entry:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Feel free to jump to the 2:00 mark. From that point on, the person _continues_ to get closer and closer and does not leave the deer alone. Now, I'm not going to waste my time linking to the hundreds of other videos where a drone gets too close to wildlife. The NPS has _1st hand knowledge_ that this was going on. Keep in mind... it is 100% illegal every place in the US... but people _still_ do it. The repercussions are that it seperates young animals from their mothers and those animals cannot fend for themselves. But hey, that person could not do without a drone shot of animals. After all, it is their right to have it.

The other reason why drones are banned from NPS is because of the damage they do. Feel free to Google Yellowstone and drone. I'll simply allow you to educate yourself. Keep in mind... this all happen when there _was_ a ban. Think what would happen if everyone could fly a drone the same way.

Last reason is that the NPS is charged with preserving the park as it is for _everyone_ to _enjoy_. I can think of nothing better than enjoying a great view.... with 20 drones buzzing around. But hey, you need that drone shot. Screw everyone else. It is not like you can fly in millions of other places.

As I mentioned above, this topic has been beat to death. If you don't like the NPS ruling, feel free to contact the appropriate people to have the rule change. As your lawyer friend should have mentioned, in addition to rules being passed because no one objected... rules won't also change if there is no objection.

 

[BlueDon]

An interesting and worrying topic. It almost seems that anything worth photographing from the air is illegal. As a retired professional photographer this is very disappointing and makes me wonder why I spent almost $3,000 AUD for something that has very limited use. I take the point about disturbing wildlife but is it not legal to go out with a gun and shoot deer. Does this not also separate mothers from youngsters? It seems to be a case of a small minority ding the wrong thing is destroying opportunities for the majority.

 

[Mr. Salty]

An interesting and worrying topic. It almost seems that anything worth photographing from the air is illegal.

Only if you have a very limited view of what's worth photographing. So far I've found very few things I want to photograph with my drone to be off limits.

I take the point about disturbing wildlife but is it not legal to go out with a gun and shoot deer.

Most national parks don't allow hunting. Some do to manage populations, but they're very much in the minority. And even then there is a lot of wildlife, including endangered species, that aren't game animals. Wildlife goes beyond deer.

 

[bushie]

.

Then go walk in the park, take your camera with you, you can buy new technology but that does not mean you can use it however you wish
There seems to be a culture of assumed entitlement (not just in this instance) around these days and a lot of whinging, I think it's largely down to how you were brought up

So you are saying that if i live in Queensland where it is perfectly legal to fly in a national park then i was bought up right if i do so but if i want to fly in South Australia where i cant get a permit i was bought up wrong. What about Western Australia where i can apply for a permit. What does that say about my upbringing

 

[BlueDon]

Only if you have a very limited view of what's worth photographing. So far I've found very few things I want to photograph with my drone to be off limits.



Most national parks don't allow hunting. Some do to manage populations, but they're very much in the minority. And even then there is a lot of wildlife, including endangered species, that aren't game animals. Wildlife goes beyond deer.

You make some interesting points but I Australia some of the best scenery is in National Parks. Admittedly I have not been stopped from photographing anything yet but I have done very little as I have not had my drone long. There just seems to be a lot of animosity towards drones both by the authorities and the public in general and it just seems so excessively restrictive. No I do not hunt and I have full respect for wildlife and would never even think of flying so close to wildlife as to cause distress but unfortunately some people have and now I (an all others) are prevented from flying in these areas. I like to photograph seascapes and I find that most of the coastline seems to be prohibited for drones. I am about to go on a cruise from Sydney to Hawaii next year and I was hoping to use my drone to document some of the trip with my drone as we will be visiting several Pacific Islands. It seems that using my drone is going to be out of the question and It looks as though I won't even be able to get any aerial shots of our ship. Yes I can get them from other sources but is is not the same as using your own creativity. I do have a commercial license in Australia but that will be of little use overseas.

 

[tcope]

An interesting and worrying topic. It almost seems that anything worth photographing from the air is illegal. As a retired professional photographer this is very disappointing and makes me wonder why I spent almost $3,000 AUD for something that has very limited use.

While I feel your pain, there are still millions of places to use the drone. When I started to use a drone I could fly without worry about what people thought. For the past few years I seriously don't know how people are going to react. People are programmed to think drones are evil and will lead to the end of life on the planet. During one of my (100% legal) shoots I was assaulted by a person while she did nothing but yell at me.

I take the point about disturbing wildlife but is it not legal to go out with a gun and shoot deer. Does this not also separate mothers from youngsters? It seems to be a case of a small minority ding the wrong thing is destroying opportunities for the majority.

I know next to nothing about hunting but from what I know.... no. Hunting season is very short. I'm betting it comes at a time when this most likely would not happen. Hunting is also _very_ regulated. There is a short time to hunt, you can only hunt certain animals, you can only shoot animals that meet certain criteria and you must pay a fee. In the case of using a drone to photo/video animals... they simply require that you not harass the animals. It is not that they cannot be filmed.

 

[Lubar]

I for one appreciate video of wildlife in their natural state. The video of the mule deer earlier in this post is something I probability will never see unless I fly a drone. Neither will elderly, handicapped, children and people to lazy to get out of their cars as there driving through the national parks. How many of you knew what kind of deer those were? Those deer were not disturbed (to the point of stress) or they would have run away real quick.
Here's a fact that will stress deer and separate the mom's from their fawns.

Over 10 million people spend nearly $6 billion to hunt deer in the United States each year. Over 6 million deer are killed during the hunting season, based on state agency records.
In the United States over 1 million deer are killed each year by collisions with autos. Not every drone pilot is a irresponsible person.

 

[ac0j]

I'm curious - would you extend that courtesy to all land owners?

Absolutely Yes. Everywhere where the landowner is EVERYONE in the United States.
AND, I would consider for privately owned and lived on land by permission only. Just like hunting or any other form of trespass. Except at certain altitudes, BUT I would want those altitudes to exceed the 400' maximum for drones.

 

[ac0j]

I for one appreciate video of wildlife in their natural state. The video of the mule deer earlier in this post is something I probability will never see unless I fly a drone. Neither will elderly, handicapped, children and people to lazy to get out of their cars as there driving through the national parks. How many of you knew what kind of deer those were? Those deer were not disturbed (to the point of stress) or they would have run away real quick.
Here's a fact that will stress deer and separate the mom's from their fawns.

Over 10 million people spend nearly $6 billion to hunt deer in the United States each year. Over 6 million deer are killed during the hunting season, based on state agency records.
In the United States over 1 million deer are killed each year by collisions with autos. Not every drone pilot is a irresponsible person.

Deer season is set up to control deer population. Firearm season has limited permits available and only lasts 10 days a year. The permits are not cheap, and are available in quantities that reflect the deer overpopulation in given areas. Some areas do not issue permits at all.
Archery season lasts a month or two, and also requires permits. But the success rates are far smaller than firearm.
if there were not 6,000,000 deer harvested, the amount being hit by cars would increase dramatically. So If you are suggesting deer hunters are less responsible than you as a drone pilot, that doesnt make sense.

 

[sar104]

Absolutely Yes. Everywhere where the landowner is EVERYONE in the United States.
AND, I would consider for privately owned and lived on land by permission only. Just like hunting or any other form of trespass. Except at certain altitudes, BUT I would want those altitudes to exceed the 400' maximum for drones.

So you propose to give all land owners control of the airspace above their property up to 500 ft or so?

 

[ac0j]

So you propose to give all land owners control of the airspace above their property up to 500 ft or so?

If they reside there, yes. if it is just farmland or pastureland, or open country, NO.
They could also just erect a 500 foot tower and wouldnt need "control"

 

[sar104]

If they reside there, yes. if it is just farmland or pastureland, or open country, NO.
They could also just erect a 500 foot tower and wouldnt need "control"

There you go - just like that you have solved the problem for the NPS. All they need to do is put up big towers all over their land. Maybe 100% wind farm coverage - two birds with one stone. Brilliant. You should inform them immediately.

 

[ac0j]

There you go - just like that you have solved the problem for the NPS. All they need to do is put up big towers all over their land. Maybe 100% wind farm coverage - two birds with one stone. Brilliant. You should inform them immediately.

You asked my opinion and you got it. The tower was Irony, that you failed to catch?

 

[Lubar]

Deer season is set up to control deer population. Firearm season has limited permits available and only lasts 10 days a year. The permits are not cheap, and are available in quantities that reflect the deer overpopulation in given areas. Some areas do not issue permits at all.
Archery season lasts a month or two, and also requires permits. But the success rates are far smaller than firearm.
if there were not 6,000,000 deer harvested, the amount being hit by cars would increase dramatically. So If you are suggesting deer hunters are less responsible than you as a drone pilot, that doesnt make sense.

No I wasn't suggesting deer hunters are less responsible. Been a hunter for 60 years. What I meant is that the drone pilot was not stressing the deer. Not nearly as much as I would during needed hunting season.

 

[sar104]

You asked my opinion and you got it. The tower was Irony, that you failed to catch?

Irony? I thought it was a great idea.

 

[TheCordman]

I've been traveling around with work the last few months and I'm am so tired of this no fly zone over state and national parks.
I understand their foolish reason for it but it is just that, a foolish reason.
I was told by a attorney who focuses on sUAS laws that these rules were passed because no one fought against them.
Recently, I was in San Francisco. What wild life are they concerned about on Alcatraz that it has a no fly zone over it? Most of the Western shore line is blocked as well. Then I go to a Regional Park that has no air space restriction and a park ranger tries to give me the you can't fly here. When I asked why, I get the typical animal conversation. What are we going to disturb or damage 50-100 feet in the air.
I think DJI needs to use some of its profits and fight these rules. Even if we have to get permission first is ok. But just a blanket no fly zone is not right.

National Parks can grant permission if they want to I think. Have you asked for permission.

 

[ac0j]

Irony? I thought it was a great idea.

That was just to point out that anyone can do that, if farther than 5 miles from an airport, you only need to tell the FAA you are doing it, and where it will be. You dont have to ask permission from them.
Also, that if the airspace is accessible from the ground in any manner, while still connected, that airspace should be controlled by the people that are IN it.

 

[dannybgoode]

So you propose to give all land owners control of the airspace above their property up to 500 ft or so?

Under UK civil law that is exactly the situation. Of course it is most often ignored and rarely tested in caught but technically overflying private land at anywhere from 500-1000’ (the exact height is purposefully vague) is trespassing and a civil case could be brought about by the landowner.

It is not however a criminal matter and the CAA have no say in the matter either so there is no breach of their regulations either.

The police however have been given greater powers to clamp down on drone pilots who are perceived to be causing a breach of the peace.