United States National Park Ban

[EyeFlightDrone]

First Thursday of every month a certain amount drone operators based on the size of the park should be allowed flight.

Cool vid!

 

[ColinF]

Don't think I said anything that was not correct.

"when the remit of these services is to make the parks available to everyone." What I pointed out is 1) this is not a service of the NPS within that context and 2).... as its out of context, it is incorrect.

There is a 100% ban on drones in National Parks and yet, people still fly within them. "Allowing" drones would make the situation even worse. People who don't know now that they are banned would instead see that they are allowed and not bother to understand a limited permit is needed. Spend a lot of money to get to a National Park and want to fly your drone only to find out your can't get a limited permit? Screw it, just fly anyway. After all, it took a lot to get there. There is less of a chance of getting caught if they let some people fly. Limited number of permits? I guess there will only be a few drones stuck in geysers, bussing around people while they attempt to enjoy the area or just a few people getting hit because someone needed a drone shot of a popular attraction.

But hey, a few thousand people getting a drone shot outweighs the enjoyment of millions. After all, you can't take a photo if it is not from a drone.

I plan my vacations. I waited almost a year at one point for reservations to Alcatraz. It certainly is easier just to say no and ban it 100%. It is harder to find a way for controlled access. You could not allow access had the highly pedestrian traffic area and only allow in remote areas. You could increase the penalty substantially for those who violate the regulation and increase signage. Allowing some access is better than not allowing any access. You could only allow permits in advance. As to people flying in parks if they bring their drone, they do that already, so that would not be much different.

The NPS in their memorandum stated the ban was an interim policy while they studied the use. They did not allow any public comment or debate. They need to minimally do what they said and replace the memorandum with an actual regulation which would allow full public comment and proposals to be made in favor of allowing it, and proposals for permenent regulation.

I do appreciate you giving me the courtesy of your opinions, and I respect them. No one wants idiots by the hundreds or thousands flying drones in parks uncontrolled. Where we differ is in the thought that it can be controlled or not.

 

[ColinF]

The problem is how, though. Imagine that every camera that you see in the parks were a drone. That would obviously be both obnoxious and somewhat dangerous. I suspect that the parks will go to some kind of restricted location, permit-based system eventually, but not anytime very soon.

I agree with your concern, and the outcome you suggest is what I believe as well. They have had four years now, so my point it they really need to have a study to come up with a proposal. The memorandum was supposed to be interim.

 

[ColinF]

First Thursday of every month a certain amount drone operators based on the size of the park should be allowed flight.

Cool vid!

Excellent idea!!

 

[tcope]

You could not allow access had the highly pedestrian traffic area and only allow in remote areas.

How about 1/2 miles away from hot spots? A mile away from hot spots? Again, now what people would hear is that drones are allowed. The other problem... drones can easily fly a mile or two. So they could just as easily fly to those hot spots. Same as if they took off from the location.

You could increase the penalty substantially for those who violate the regulation and increase signage. Thos citation would not even come close to paying for the extra man power needed. Popular parks are already _WAY_ understaffed. This would simply take funds and manpower away from other places it was already spread too thin.

Allowing some access is better than not allowing any access. You could only allow permits in advance. As to people flying in parks if they bring their drone, they do that already, so that would not be much different.

Again, the problem is putting the word out that drones are allowed. They are 100% not allowed now and it is _still_ an issue. Obviously it would become a bigger issue if they were allowed... partially.

The NPS in their memorandum stated the ban was an interim policy while they studied the use. They did not allow any public comment or debate. They need to minimally do what they said and replace the memorandum with an actual regulation which would allow full public comment and proposals to be made in favor of allowing it, and proposals for permenent regulation.

There is no vote needed. They were well within their rights to ban drones. Besides, if it were put to a vote... drone fliers would be a in HUGE minority. You'd lose that vote, hands down. But again, there is no vote and the ban is in place.

I fly drones. I'd love to fly in NP. I am 100% for the ban on drones in NP. I have a million other great places to fly. I don't need to ruin the enjoyment of hundreds of others just because I think I'm entitled to a drone photo. IMHO, the NPS does a _very_ good job.

 

[Gringorio]

I also favor the ban. Keep your drone out of our national treasures. There are plenty more places to fly...

 

[GRSp]

And now the link to the video....

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

Great video

 

[n5ac]

As a frequent visitor to the NPS and a regular annual pass holder, I’m generally not in favor of drones in the parks. One year we went to Yellowstone there was an Eagle not too far from the West Entrance to the park. The rangers were working hard to ensure traffic did not stop too close nor make too much noise to disrupt the family. I simply cannot imagine this scenario with a drone pilot trying to snap pictures of the nest. And gosh I’d hate to have to be a ranger keeping the area under control with people flying drones.

In my mind, the only way for it to work would be for the NPS to hire a drone expert for every park and have geomapped TFR areas administered by the parks and disseminated digitally. That’s a lot of work to setup and make play. If they did that, we (you) would have to pay the salary of that guy (gal) plus all the software and systems to make it work. How would you feel about this proposal and a $100 pilot pass for a park for a week or whatever?

 

[ColinF]

As a frequent visitor to the NPS and a regular annual pass holder, I’m generally not in favor of drones in the parks. One year we went to Yellowstone there was an Eagle not too far from the West Entrance to the park. The rangers were working hard to ensure traffic did not stop too close nor make too much noise to disrupt the family. I simply cannot imagine this scenario with a drone pilot trying to snap pictures of the nest. And gosh I’d hate to have to be a ranger keeping the area under control with people flying drones.

In my mind, the only way for it to work would be for the NPS to hire a drone expert for every park and have geomapped TFR areas administered by the parks and disseminated digitally. That’s a lot of work to setup and make play. If they did that, we (you) would have to pay the salary of that guy (gal) plus all the software and systems to make it work. How would you feel about this proposal and a $100 pilot pass for a park for a week or whatever?

Hi, yes, agree that is not a scenario any reasonable person wants, where wildlife get harassed by an unthinking drone operator. I like your idea. For the people that want to aerial film, they will pay the fee quite willingly. It also allows the NPS to know who is doing what and where. I ask so love the geofencing idea. There are vast swaths of beautiful country that is remote and sharing that is reasonable. Geofence sensitive areas. And increase penalties for irresponsible or non permitted operators. Have a testing procedure for anyone that want to operate in a park.

 

[Inspirephil]

Not me. This drone pilot and VERY frequent visitor to Zion and Yellowstone and Teton and Canyonlands and Arches National Parks is STRONGLY in favor of of the ban.

Everyone will have different opinions on this subject but I am in favor of removing or at least amending this regulation/ban for “RESPONSIBLE” drone pilots, and I stress the word responsible! But there’s always going to be the idiots out there who ruin it for the rest of us.

 

[Inspirephil]

The problem is how, though. Imagine that every camera that you see in the parks were a drone. That would obviously be both obnoxious and somewhat dangerous. I suspect that the parks will go to some kind of restricted location, permit-based system eventually, but not anytime very soon.

I like that idea!

 

[jerryflah]

There has to be controls. I agree no one wants fleets of unchecked quads flying around. With the correct rules and controls it is managble. Allow it only at certain times of the year. Sell permits and only allow a certain number at different areas, etc. Banning everyone is the easy way out. It would take a little work by the NPS, but it would be better than just saying no to everyone.

All this control costs money. The NPS is already seriously underfunded. Where will the resources come from? The present administration has no motive to provide NPS with additional funding. In fact they seem to be more interested in using the Parks as a resource for potential profit. And of course, this "little work" you suggest might just be monumental. Not only planning but Enforcing would mean increasing staff substantially. As some have already suggested, a memory of these lands or even the IDEA of their existence is sufficient

 

[Inspirephil]

And now the link to the video....

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

I just posted your video on the Facebook page of Official DJI Owners and I hope you don’t object to my doing so. This subject is too important to leave it only here on this forum.

 

[ColinF]

Everyone will have different opinions on this subject but I am in favor of removing or at least amending this regulation/ban for “RESPONSIBLE” drone pilots, and I stress the word responsible! But there’s always going to be the idiots out there who ruin it for the rest of us.

I agree 100% and it was the idiots that caused the reaction from the NPS in the first place.... a tourist that flew his drone into a geiser at Yellowstone. It is very difficult to regulate away stupid. But to ban all because of stupid people, I think is a step too far. Also, the ban was to be interim while they could come up with rules. They need to follow-thru, and at a minimum craft a well thought-out regulation. As it is crafted now, if I camp out in a park, and my 10 year old takes out his pocket size toy drone and flies it in our camp site, he committed a misdemeanor offense.

 

[ColinF]

I just posted your video on the Facebook page of Official DJI Owners and I hope you don’t object to my doing so. This subject is too important to leave it only here on this forum.

Hi, no issue from me. I did this very carefully to ensure I broke no regulations or laws, with the purpose to get a discussion going. I am not on FB though, so I won’t be able to follow the conversation.

 

[ColinF]

All this control costs money. The NPS is already seriously underfunded. Where will the resources come from? The present administration has no motive to provide NPS with additional funding. In fact they seem to be more interested in using the Parks as a resource for potential profit. And of course, this "little work" you suggest might just be monumental. Not only planning but Enforcing would mean increasing staff substantially. As some have already suggested, a memory of these lands or even the IDEA of their existence is sufficient

Yes, it always comes back to the money. A joint partnership between major drone manufacturers and government, as well as fee’s specific to the use is a potential starting point. It could be piloted (no pun intended) in one park as a start to gauge the demand, the statistics on violations, impact to the park, and run costs, etc.

 

[DroningOn]

I agree 100% and it was the idiots that caused the reaction from the NPS in the first place.....

The National Park ban happened long before any “idiot” did anything. It was put in place before any wildlife was disturbed or a visitor was bothered. It was a knee jerk reaction implemented by bureaucrats who know NOTHING about drones or their negligible impact on the parks.

 

[ColinF]

How about 1/2 miles away from hot spots? A mile away from hot spots? Again, now what people would hear is that drones are allowed. The other problem... drones can easily fly a mile or two. So they could just as easily fly to those hot spots. Same as if they took off from the location.

Not sure I said vote, but public comment on the regulation, which in fact there is no regulation now. There is an interim memorandum. I would disagree that just because the majority thinks it should be banned, is not a good enough reason. Not to get off topic, but in the US we value protecting the rights of the minority even when it is unpopular.

 

[Inspirephil]

Hi, no issue from me. I did this very carefully to ensure I broke no regulations or laws, with the purpose to get a discussion going. I am not on FB though, so I won’t be able to follow the conversation.

I’ll keep you posted if anything happens from that post on Facebook.

 

[Montana John]

And now the link to the video....

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

I live near Yellowstone and visit often, alone or with guests. I DO NOT want to see or hear a drone while I am in the park. Drone use, as well as helicopter and fixed wing airplane flying is incompatible with the stated mission of the NPS (and my opinion). Everything someone wants is not therefore a right to it.