@tcope, I was clear about the parking lot being USFS land. (third sentence) That was the point, I was legal and following the letter of the law, and still got yelled at.
You're playing semantics with "own" vs. "manage", you understood what I was saying. The NPS manages the land, sure, but not the airspace.
And the video you posted, yeah probably bad form given the number of people present, but we should be allowed to fly in the NPS "managed" properties. The 14-05 memo is BS. The authority sited in it, 36 CFR 1.5 says that any "new" park "use" considered controversial should be made rule in the federal register in a timely manner (paraphrasing from memory). So tell me, why hasn't the NPS published a rule (law) regarding airspace? Oh yes, they're not the FAA and can't.
I like the part of the memo, where Director Jarvis says basically "pick a reason" and you are hearby ordered to ban drones via your compendium. Whether the superintendent's wanted to or not, they had to pick reason and band the operation of drones from within the parks.
To further that point... even the USFS spells it out on their drone FAQ page which clearly states ONLY the FAA can make rules (laws) on drone flights and that they work with the FAA when TFR's are needed.
Interestingly, USFS and NPS both belong to the Deptarment of Interior who doesn't appear to have much a stance on drones.
I concede the point of VLOS, but stated that I had positioned myself to keep VLOS. So I was still hobby, not that any of that would have made sense to the Park Ranger.
If I had stuck around, she may have still written me a ticket and then I would have had to fight it.
As far as a "whoops" I crashed, then you get into "land" vs. "crash" which have very different meanings in aviation. Not that we need to open that "can of worms".
Mini 4 Posting for posterity, my first Hyperlapse
2 Pro Exploring the Fire Mine: Secret tunnels and dark arcades