Those living in and around fire zones were also told to stop using drones to capture the scene.

[Dronecation]

“Now is not the time to be taking footage or photographs of active wildfires. Not only is it irresponsible, but it is illegal to fly them in fire areas,” said Minister of Forests Bruce Ralston.

According to BC RCMP, interfering with wildfire control efforts, including flying drones, can lead to a fine of up to $100,000 to one year in jail.

Supt. Kara Triance of Kelowna RCMP said police have received multiple reports of people flying drones in the area of the McDougall Creek wildfire, which has displaced thousands of people in the Okanagan."

British Columbians urged to leave wildfire evacuation zones, stop flying drones and stay off the water

With a provincial state of emergency declared and thousands displaced due to wildfires burning in B.C., those in active fire zones are being urged to stay out of the way of first responders.

bc.ctvnews.ca

 

[kevguy]

Supt. Kara Triance of Kelowna RCMP said police have received multiple reports of people flying drones in the area of the McDougall Creek wildfire, which has displaced thousands of people in the Okanagan.

People need to mind their own business. I don’t know what all the hate is about drones and reporting them every chance they get.

 

[Starz]

And would be interesting to know how many of those “reports” are unsubstantiated.
Local Karen’s trying to put the hurt on the hobby?

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

“Now is not the time to be taking footage or photographs of active wildfires. Not only is it irresponsible, but it is illegal to fly them in fire areas,”

They are talking about active wildfires.
Only a total idiot would fly in such an airspace, whether a designated NFZ as yet, or not.

Not only might they interrupt fire bombing by helicopters or light to Elvis size aircraft, but they can interfere with fire spotting / command aircraft ops.

 

[360]

come on man... flying in an active fire zone just to get fire phots regardless of local fire officials.. kind of selfish and condescending. If you want to help off with fire.... stay the hell away from it.

 

[umanbean]

If you want to help off with fire.... stay the hell away from it.

Or show up at Command Headquarters early one morning and volunteer to help to the best of your ability.

 

[EssenYVR]

It should be noted that firefighters could potentially be using drone detection technology to ensure their airspace is clear for safety reasons. Therefore, you shouldn't fly near an active fire zone even if your intention is to stay well below any altitudes that could pose a risk of collision.

If they do detect a drone, the big problem isn't that they might catch you, it's that you might prevent them from flying and that could contribute to the spread of the fires.

 

[mavic3usa]

Agreed with most of the posts here. However.....

 

[fivesense]

Yes, the drone pilots might catch the arsonists and other bad actors... Capturing evidence of the crime is bad...

 

[fivesense]

They are talking about active wildfires.
Only a total idiot would fly in such an airspace, whether a designated NFZ as yet, or not.

Not only might they interrupt fire bombing by helicopters or light to Elvis size aircraft, but they can interfere with fire spotting / command aircraft ops.

If there are active aircraft fighting fires in the area, yes. Stay away. If not, capture the evidence of the crimes that are being committed. None of these fires are "natural."

 

[BigAl07]

Agreed with most of the posts here. However.....

Please elaborate on this "However" aspect. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this aspect. . . .

 

[BigAl07]

If there are active aircraft fighting fires in the area, yes. Stay away. If not, capture the evidence of the crimes that are being committed. None of these fires are "natural."

Please explain how you KNOW if an aircraft is inbound or not? Please explain how you KNOW if Boots on the Ground need your assistance? What if they are in a DIRE situation, called for immediate AIR SUPPORT to suppress a fire, and your UAS causes the AIR SUPPORT to have to ABORT the mission. All of those lives are now in dire straights because of your GREEDY and IRRESPONSIBLE actions. UNACCEPTABLE!

It's NOT YOUR JOB!

Yes, the drone pilots might catch the arsonists and other bad actors... Capturing evidence of the crime is bad...

Capturing EVIDENCE is not your JOB! If you're flying your UAS to "capture evidence" and you prevent FIRE FIGHTERS from entering the area who is the hero and who is the ZERO? If someone's home burns because you were "Capturing Evidence" and Fire Fighters have to abort the mission how is that going to make you feel? Hopefully HORRIBLE because your irresponsible actions hindered rescue efforts. GREED!!

I will go and on record and say this, the mere idea of "capturing evidence" is pure malarky and a lame excuse to fly an ACTIVE fire scene! It's not your job! No different than walking onto a Active Shooter Scene trying to "capture evidence" and putting more people at harm.

If you're not PART of the Incident Command Team you're a HINDERENCE and a LIABILITY. You are officially depleting resources and endangering LIVES!! NOT YOUR JOB!!

 

[rjwmorrell]

They are talking about active wildfires.
Only a total idiot would fly in such an airspace, whether a designated NFZ as yet, or not.

Not only might they interrupt fire bombing by helicopters or light to Elvis size aircraft, but they can interfere with fire spotting / command aircraft ops.

They are most definitely designated airspaces here, and there are several on the Nav Drone app we use in Canada. They are absolute no fly zones for any aircraft, including drones, unless they are directly related to firefighting.

The reason is because aerial water bombardment is happening.

 

[mavic3usa]

Agreed with most of the posts here. However.....

Please elaborate on this "However" aspect. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this aspect. . . .

Was going to say:

...however, this continues to happen and it's a problem so what are the suggestions to resolve this, what are we going to do about it? We can't just do nothing and let it continue or else that will only prove one thing, it's not really a problem that needs to be fixed. Is this another issue (like so many others) that we are so paralyzed that we cannot resolve? Somebody has to find the answer because more drones are flying, more incidents are occurring, RID is inbound, and I keep reading reports of incursions increasing more often. Frankly I'm fresh out of ideas and I'd like to know what is being done to really combat the problem rather than just "reporting" them. We have smart people here.

Honestly I don't think RID makes this go away, there has to be a different answer, a better answer. I honestly don't think drones will all of a sudden disappear from the fire scene because of RID, because even with RID, people will fly their drones to those scene for the same reasons. The answer can't be crack down harder, harsher punishment, is it? But I could be wrong....because I don't fly drones to fires.

 

[EssenYVR]

They are most definitely designated airspaces here, and there are several on the Nav Drone app we use in Canada. They are absolute no fly zones for any aircraft, including drones, unless they are directly related to firefighting.

The reason is because aerial water bombardment is happening.

And it's worth noting that aircraft fighting wildfires often need to refill from nearby bodies of water. You may not see or even be aware of the fire from, say, a lake that's on the other side of a ridge from the fire itself, but if aircraft are refilling from that lake then it's just as critical to the firefighting effort. So as part of your due diligence it's important to familiarize yourself with firefighting activities in your area. Your provincial or state government should have a web site with the details of operations currently underway.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I honestly don't think drones will all of a sudden disappear from the fire scene because of RID, because even with RID, people will fly their drones to those scene for the same reasons. The answer can't be crack down harder, harsher punishment, is it?

It might be that support service to firefighting efforts generally include police, forestry people etc, and where RID is implemented any support personnel trained might be able to use the tech to find pilots and be able to get their flights to cease.
Educate them if possible first, but be able to keep records of incursions and prosecute repeat offenders appropriately as a last resort if they don't take the importance on board.

This thread is to do with Canada of course, and like anywhere outside the USA (at this point in time) is not able to use RID tech to this effect.
I can see RID tech coming to other countries like Canada, UK, EU, Australia, New Zealand etc, bound to come in eventually to western countries in the coming years.

Education of new drone pilots through the sales process has really been good here in Australia, info on retailers sales websites, pamphlets inside the drone box, point of sales education, all at least making new drone pilots purchasing a drone that there are rules, outling these, and pointing them to the CASA website (Australian FAA equivalent).

I consider not flying in emergency airspace to be a rule like 400' / 120m altitude and vlos rules, and for good reason.
Even in the early stages of a fire, you spot smoke etc, report it and leave the airspace.
Emergency services may send a manned aircraft to sitrep the area, especially if remote / inaccessible.

It's the same for highway emergencies / traffic accidents, no pilot should want to be responsible for a medivac turning away due to a drone seen flying nearby.

 

[shb]

you prevent FIRE FIGHTERS from entering the area

How is a drone going to prevent fire fighters from entering an area? No intelligent drone pilot would fly over a fire. They're probably shooting from a long distance away with their zoom.

 

[spsphotos]

If a drone is spotted near a wildfire they with GROUND all other aircraft thus allowing the fire to go unchecked. Don't be that guy.

 

[MARK (LI)]

How is a drone going to prevent fire fighters from entering an area? No intelligent drone pilot would fly over a fire. They're probably shooting from a long distance away with their zoom.

A fire fighting chopper pilot delivering supplies or water would be considered "commercial" and is required to maintain 1,000 vertical distance and 3 miles horizontal distance from another aircraft........so even if a drone were a foot off the ground the chopper pilot would have to stay above an altitude which would permit him to conduct his duties.....you think a drone with a zoom lens is going to be able to get desired pictures from 3 miles away from the fire scene?...forget about the chopper's flight path.
The problem being addressed here is that a lot of drone operators are proving that they are not very intelligent.

 

[dfross]

come on man... flying in an active fire zone just to get fire phots regardless of local fire officials.. kind of selfish and condescending. If you want to help off with fire.... stay the hell away from it.

It might be that support service to firefighting efforts generally include police, forestry people etc, and where RID is implemented any support personnel trained might be able to use the tech to find pilots and be able to get their flights to cease.
Educate them if possible first, but be able to keep records of incursions and prosecute repeat offenders appropriately as a last resort if they don't take the importance on board.

This thread is to do with Canada of course, and like anywhere outside the USA (at this point in time) is not able to use RID tech to this effect.
I can see RID tech coming to other countries like Canada, UK, EU, Australia, New Zealand etc, bound to come in eventually to western countries in the coming years.

Education of new drone pilots through the sales process has really been good here in Australia, info on retailers sales websites, pamphlets inside the drone box, point of sales education, all at least making new drone pilots purchasing a drone that there are rules, outling these, and pointing them to the CASA website (Australian FAA equivalent).

I consider not flying in emergency airspace to be a rule like 400' / 120m altitude and vlos rules, and for good reason.
Even in the early stages of a fire, you spot smoke etc, report it and leave the airspace.
Emergency services may send a manned aircraft to sitrep the area, especially if remote / inaccessible.

It's the same for highway emergencies / traffic accidents, no pilot should want to be responsible for a medivac turning away due to a drone seen flying nearby.

I was evacuated from my home due to a wildfire this Spring (Sept-Iles, Qc, Canada).
I watched those guys flying like maniacs to save our homes.
Dangerous enough - for them - as it is.

The least I could do was to curb my (otherwise rampant) pro-drone enthusiasm and free the airspace.
DF Ross