This Issue is VERY IMPORTANT to All UAS Pilot in the U.S.A.

[ac0j]

you can buy them books..........

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

The sign in YOUR OP put you on notice. Dont think because you didnt break federal rules, that you didnt break LOCAL rules. States and city's can make rules and regulations at will. When you are facing them, in there courts, about their rules. YOU LOSE!
States can choose if they want to agree with federal regulations. I.E., Marijuana use and possession is against federal law, but look how many states are ignoring that. Also, you cannot buy legal alcohol in Dry counties in many states even though it is NOT against federal laws. There is NO relevance between FAA rules and state park rules.

It seems the forum members have not been paying attention here! Please feel free for any forum member here who can show me ANY California State Law that says ANYTHING about prohibits UAS flight in the Chino Hills State Park! PLEASE SHOW ME THE STATE LAW THAT I VIOLATED BY FLYING MY UAS IN THE U.S. NATIONAL AIRSPACE ABOVE THE STATE PARK!!!!!

We need to stay on track here. The Park Police Officer verbally charged me for violating a very specific state law that refers to the state law that supports the Inland Empire District ORDER #950-16-001 that says, "NO DRONE - MODEL AIRCRAFT OR UAS FLIGHT IN THE PARK" http://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/648/files/Chino Hills SP Posted Orders.pdf

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 14. NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION 3. DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL

14 CCR § 4326

§ 4326. Violation of Posted Orders or Special Use, Special Event, Film or Collection Permit.
(The Park POLICE OFFICER wrote in on citation #889505 "NO DRONES") Dropbox - IMG_3231_lum_bas_cb_100_ edit.jpg


No person shall
(a) violate any provision of an order posted pursuant to the provisions of section 4301(i) hereof including, but not limited to, prohibited areas, use periods, no alcoholic beverage areas, no smoking areas and no parking areas, where posted in accordance with 4301(q),

14 CCR § 4301
§ 4301. Definitions
(i) Posting of Notices. The term “posted” as used herein, unless otherwise indicated, shall mean and require that the Department shall set aside at the district headquarters and at the unit affected and in a location convenient to the general public, a bulletin board or similar device upon which shall be posted all special instructions, orders, pertaining to units of the district including but not limited to special hours of operation, swimming and boating restrictions, hunting and camping restrictions, and special instructions pertaining to areas where activities are curtailed or restricted. Proof of posting shall be filed in the offices of the division chiefs or the Sacramento California Office of the Division of Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation.

To be very clear, what the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Inland Empire District ORDER #950-16-001 states, "To protect wildlife and cultural resources, and for the safety and welfare of visitors and staff; the Park Units in the Inland Empire are closed to the use of Model Aircraft, Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) and Gliders in flight".

To be very clear here, that the Inland Empire District ORDER #950-16-001 is the ONLY legal document that supports the "NO DRONES" sign posted at the entrance of the Chino Hills State Park that the Park Police Officer is referring to on citation #889505. http://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/648/files/Chino Hills SP Posted Orders.pdf

A District posted order is NOT a state law! ALL California State Laws are located in the
OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Br...ansitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)

What the state of California has done here by prohibiting UAS aircraft flight in the state park, the management of the State Park Service has gone far beyond the limits of the states' legal jurisdiction or authority to enforce.

On June 20, 2018 the Federal Aviation Administration put out a press release on the subject "FEDERAL VS. LOCAL DRONE AUTHORITY" that states, "Congress has provided the FAA with exclusive authority to regulate aviation safety, the efficiency of the navigable airspace, and air traffic control, among other things. State and local governments are not permitted to regulate any type of aircraft operations, such as flight paths or altitudes, or the navigable airspace".

However, these powers are not the same as regulation of aircraft landing sites, which involves local control of land and zoning. Laws traditionally related to state and local police power – including land use, zoning, privacy, and law enforcement operations – generally are not subject to federal regulation.

Cities and municipalities are not permitted to have their own rules or regulations governing the operation of aircraft.
However, as indicated, they may generally determine the location of aircraft landing sites through their land use powers". Press Release – FAA Statement–Federal vs. Local Drone Authority

It seems that the State of California has put themselves into a very serious legal situation that will effect every state in the nation!

If anyone is able to show me any written California State Law that I violated in this case, I will happily pay the fine of $230.00 to the California Superior Court and I will also publicly apologize for my personal statements on this forum about this case!

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

The problem was not the legality of the flight itself, which local authorities cannot regulate, as you stated. The problem is the legality of aircraft operations (takeoff and landing), which they certainly can regulate. All National Parks, for example, ban aircraft operations, even though they acknowledge that flying over their land is perfectly legal. Many state and local parks do the same. They are not regulating the airspace.

Had you taken off from outside the park and flown over it you would be correct but, assuming that you took of from inside the park then the UAS operation ban is legal and you broke that law.

There is not California State law against taking off or landing a UAS in any California State Park!

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

Just out of curiosity, where were you standing or landing the drone? If you go down this avenue, won’t they just correct the sign?

I took off from the ground, there was no reason for me to perform a hand launch or to hand catch my UAS. again, There is not California State law against taking off or landing a UAS in any California State Park!

And sure, the park service can change the sign but that will not have any effect on the result in this court case.

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

The problem was not the legality of the flight itself, which local authorities cannot regulate, as you stated. The problem is the legality of aircraft operations (takeoff and landing), which they certainly can regulate. All National Parks, for example, ban aircraft operations, even though they acknowledge that flying over their land is perfectly legal. Many state and local parks do the same. They are not regulating the airspace.

Had you taken off from outside the park and flown over it you would be correct but, assuming that you took of from inside the park then the UAS operation ban is legal and you broke that law.

If there was any current Temporary Flight Restriction against flying a UAS in the U.S. airspace over the Chino Hills State Park. If there was a TFR about this, the F.A.A. would place a "NO FLY ZONE" in the geofencing over the park. The UAS that I was flying was manufactured by DJI that it's computer would not allow for my UAS motors to even start up if my UAS was located inside of a genuine F.A.A. "NO FLY ZONE" geofencing area. Since I did submit a flight plan to the F.A.A. through the L.A.A.N.C. system prior to my flight and my flight plan was approved by the F.A.A. through the L.A.A.N.C. system, I was assured that my flight was 100% legal under F.A.A. regulations! FAA UAS Data Exchange

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

in alaska the state parks adopted the same flight rules for drones that apply to regular aircraft.,,,, so if you want to say take video or pics of animals of any kind you have to be at 1,400' ,,,, if you can only fly 400' this effectually outlaws animal photag with drones on state parks. and yes if you are standing in the park when you launch you are breaking the rules. i dont have enough zeros in my bank account to force the issue. eventually enough folks will make their voices heard and change things. took years to get airboat access to federal land and we are still fighting for it.

Thank you for your comment but it has no bearing on this subject.

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

The problem was not the legality of the flight itself, which local authorities cannot regulate, as you stated. The problem is the legality of aircraft operations (takeoff and landing), which they certainly can regulate. All National Parks, for example, ban aircraft operations, even though they acknowledge that flying over their land is perfectly legal. Many state and local parks do the same. They are not regulating the airspace.

Had you taken off from outside the park and flown over it you would be correct but, assuming that you took of from inside the park then the UAS operation ban is legal and you broke that law.

You forgot one very important fact. Above every National Park boundary there is a digital geofencing "NO FLY ZONE" controlled by the F.A.A.. This geofencing zone informs any and all UAS pilots that flying is totally restricted by F.A.A. regulations. Therefore, you would also be incorrect that flying a UAS over any National Park was legal because it is illegal.

And yes, you did get one statement correct here. States can regulate aircraft from taking off or landing inside the boundary of all National Parks.

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

They do if you were physically flying from within the park. The state can regulate what you do on park property. You can however, stand outside the park and then fly over it. If you were standing on park property while you were flying, the state is in the right and you won't get anywhere.

We are discussing about the jurisdiction of UAS flight in the U.S. airspace above a California State Park. I has nothing to do with the location where I was controlling my UAS from. The state can prohibit a UAS from taking off or landing from a state park but the State of California does not currently have any state law that prohibits a UAS from taking off or landing from any California State Park.

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

Most State Parks in Pennsylvania also ban drone operations.

This is off the subject here. Thanks for your comment.

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

The signs he posted say "IN the park". To me that's a totally legit sign. You cant fly, take off, land or operate a drone while you're IN the park. It doesn't claim "over".

If the OP was standing inside the park to takeoff, land OR operate the drone he has committed an offence.

You have to consider the entire language posted in the sign. The sign prohibits "FLIGHT" of any UAS in the park. The F.A.A. controls the navigable airspace over the entire United State including over the Chino Hills State Park. The sign prohibits UAS flight in the park which is actually impossible to fly "in the park" because "the F.A.A. has the exclusive authority to regulate aviation safety, the efficiency of the navigable airspace, and air traffic control, among other things. State and local governments are not permitted to regulate any type of aircraft operations, such as flight paths or altitudes, or the navigable airspace". Press Release – FAA Statement–Federal vs. Local Drone Authority

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

Whoa boy...where'd that bag of popcorn go?

Hey, thanks for your comment, I like popcorn too!

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

Unmanned Aircraft System (Drones) in State Parks

"Drones are currently allowed in State Parks, State Beaches, State Historic Parks, State Recreational Areas, and State Vehicular Recreation Areas except where prohibited by a District Superintendent’s posted order."

This would seem to cover it if you were on park property while operating. Whether not that is codified in any strict legal sense, I don't know.

The California State Park website confirms your statement to be accurate. A District Superintendent posted order does NOT make that order into a state law!

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

No it doesn't. It says, "No Model Aircraft or UAS Flights in the Park"

Then answer this question, Is it possible to fly a UAS and at the same time the UAS in also on the ground? The F.A.A. has the exclusive jurisdiction of aircraft flight that begins from the ground up!

Busting Myths about the FAA and Unmanned Aircraft Busting Myths about the FAA and Unmanned Aircraft

Thanks for your comment.

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

And once again, you are wrong. If you launched and/or landed from property that is part of the state park, then you are in violation.

Please show me any California state law that restricts the takeoff or landing of a UAS inside the border of the park?

There is simply no law against launching and/or landed a UAS from state property that is part of the state park. The states legal authority and jurisdiction ends the moment a UAS takes off from the ground. At that point, the F.A.A. has the exclusive jurisdiction over aircraft flight in the U.S. airspace. Press Release – FAA Statement–Federal vs. Local Drone Authority

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

So just to be clear, you observed a "No Drone, Model Aircraft or UAS Flights in the Park" but you are now arguing that there are no regulations preventing a UAS from taking off or landing inside the State Park? Instead, you are insisting that the stated prohibition is on the airspace over the park (even though that's not their jurisdiction and that's not what the sign says). Your position is completely illogical.

And it doesn't require the enactment of a new law to prohibit activities - it's at the discretion of the District Superintendent.

Unmanned Aircraft System (Drones) in State Parks

You are not going to win this argument with the state, because your argument is simply wrong.

The Supremacy Clause

Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause. It establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. It prohibits states from interfering with the federal government's exercise of its constitutional powers, and from assuming any functions that are exclusively entrusted to the federal government. It does not, however, allow the federal government to review or veto state laws before they take effect. Supremacy Clause

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

I'm with you bro but---Read the FAA letter- Land rights and or ownership comes in to play for the state to have a say so- Chino state park they have the right to tell you can not take off or land inside the park. I live in Laguna and I deal with the city all the time regarding this BS. The good news is FAA is pro drone--But someone is going to have to duke it out with cities in the courts before this goes away. Beach comber is right- Wonder if you could be inside the park and launch and land in your hand???lol Once anything is off the ground FAA 100% authority. Bottom line somebody will be in for a long fight with the state of Ca and the cities. I just fly and deal with the bs- If you can't dazzle them with brilliance-Baffle them with ********

Hey Red Baron, thanks for your comment. I have been flying UAS aircraft for many years and I am currently enrolled in online classes to get my commercial UAS pilot certification. The F.A.A. testing process asks a great deal questions about aviation law and regulations regarding UAS flight. I try to keep up with the current the F.A.A UAS regulations. The F.A.A. has developed a relatively new program called the L.A.A.N.C. system. Here is a link about the new system that is designed for commercial UAS pilots but recreation UAS pilots can use the system to insure that they are flying legally. FAA UAS Data Exchange

The app is available from AIRMAP. Airspace Authorization

 

[CanyonRunVideos]

Your screwed. Pay the fine and move on. It was posted, you ignored it and got caught. Dont think for a minute that it has anything to do with airspace when you are ON THEIR GROUNDS breaking their rules. They have full authority to say no drones on our property.
Quoting FAA stuff that mostly applies to full sized aircraft is just wasting your breath. You fly a TOY. You are not a fighter pilot.

ALL of the links I am sharing on this forum are exclusively about UAS regulations. I don't think that it's a waste of my time for me to take a stand against my legal rights that has been violated by the State of California in any way sir!

If know one ever takes a stand against this cause then why spend your hard earned dollars to purchase a UAS when soon there will not be any place to fly your UAS, RIGHT?

 

[sar104]

There is not California State law against taking off or landing a UAS in any California State Park!

There doesn't need to be a state law against it. As I, and others, posted previously, the district superintendent has the discretion and authority, according to the California Department of Parks and Recreation, to implement bans on these kinds of activities.

Unmanned Aircraft System (Drones) in State Parks

If you want to challenge their authority to do that then hire a lawyer, fight the case, and let us know how it turns out.

You forgot one very important fact. Above every National Park boundary there is a digital geofencing "NO FLY ZONE" controlled by the F.A.A.. This geofencing zone informs any and all UAS pilots that flying is totally restricted by F.A.A. regulations. Therefore, you would also be incorrect that flying a UAS over any National Park was legal because it is illegal.

Now you are simply posting complete nonsense. There is no such "digital geofencing" or "no fly zone" over National Parks, controlled by the FAA or anyone else. The airspace over National Parks is not controlled or restricted in any way by virtue of them being parks, although it may be controlled or restricted for air traffic or other reasons. By default, flights over National Parks, whether manned or sUAS, are allowed.

And yes, you did get one statement correct here. States can regulate aircraft from taking off or landing inside the boundary of all National Parks.

I didn't make that statement, and it is also incorrect. States do not have authority over National Parks - they are under Federal control. Can you not get even the simplest facts correct? You really are wasting your and everyone else's time here with this ridiculous, ignorant ranting.

 

[Frightwriter]

Have you ever seen a Posted Notice similar to the photograph below in ANY State Park in the United States before?
View attachment 42721 On May 25, 2018 I was approached by the California State Park Police Officer informing me that it is ILLEGAL TO FLY a DRONE over ANY State Park!

I immediately informed the officer that his statement was NOT TRUE!

I informed him that I was flying LEGALLY under F.A.A. Section 336/101E and that I was flying in Class G Airspace.

I had submitted a flight plan that was approved by the F.A.A using the L.A.A.N.C system through the AIRMAP app but the officer did not even look interested in what I had to say.

The Park Police Officer gave me a citation for flying my UAS over Chino Hills State Park

The State of California Parks and Recreation Department has absolutely NO JURISDICTION or LEGAL AUTHORITY to prohibit UAS flight over the Chino Hills State Park. The U.S. airspace including the airspace over each and every California State Park are solely controlled by the Federal Aviation Administration.

Now here is the where the fun part of this story gets very exciting! On July 20, 2018 the F.A.A. gave a Press Release for Immediate Release:

Press Release – FAA Statement–Federal vs. Local Drone Authority

View attachment 42737

FAA Statement – Federal vs. Local Drone Authority

Congress has provided the FAA with exclusive authority to regulate aviation safety, the efficiency of the navigable airspace, and air traffic control, among other things. State and local governments are not permitted to regulate any type of aircraft operations, such as flight paths or altitudes, or the navigable airspace.

However, these powers are not the same as regulation of aircraft landing sites, which involves local control of land and zoning. Laws traditionally related to state and local police power – including land use, zoning, privacy, and law enforcement operations – generally are not subject to federal regulation.

Cities and municipalities are not permitted to have their own rules or regulations governing the operation of aircraft.
However, as indicated, they may generally determine the location of aircraft landing sites through their land use powers.

In the context of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) – popularly called “drones”— the Department of Transportation’s UAS Integration Pilot Program (IPP), directed by the President, will provide the FAA with insight on how to best involve local jurisdictions in the integration of UAS into the airspace (PDF) in a way that also alleviates their concerns. On May 9, the Secretary of Transportation announced the selection of 10 state, local, and tribal governments as participants in the pilot program. These entities will partner with private sector participants to safely explore the further integration of drone operations. We’re looking forward to working with the IPP participants as we look to the future.

I will be requesting the California Superior Court to inform the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation to immediately remove all of the NO DRONE Flight View attachment 42721 signs that are currently posted in several of the California State Parks.

I will also request that the court redact all and any State Park district orders that prohibits UAS flight over the California State Parks immediately.

I would love to hear the thoughts from the other UAS Pilots in the U.S. over this issue.

Thank you,

L. Kent Elliott

And for Godssake...whatever you do, DO NOT USE A PLASTIC STRAW in that park either! LMAO! Hey, it's Cali...whaddya expect! Hope you win...its getting RIDICULOUS at state and local levels! Drive on!

 

[ac0j]

WOW. Someone has been busy!
Tons of reply’s multiposted like a boss!
You need to research “regulations”. They can be imposed by any government agency and have the full power of law. The no drone sign you ignored put you on notice that there was a regulation about drones. You can argue all you want. But citing the FAA will not help you in this case.