United States National Park Ban

[ScubaBob]

I appreciate you have strong feelings, and I respect that. With that said, I don’t want anyone to break any laws. I respect the law greatly. No one should fly in National Parks at this time. It is against the regulations. (Not sure if you are implying that I broke a law, but just in case, I’ll reiterate, the video I produced did not break any laws. I went to great lengths to ensure I was within FAA, NPS, and local regulations.) What I am suggesting is the law (well, to be precise, the interim memorandum) needs to be changed. This is a very American and democratic thing to do, and the right thing to do if you disagree with the law. Never break the law or regulations. As to drones in National Parks, I do believe limited access could be balanced with thoughtful regulation. I would have loved to experience the pristine scene you described (up until the snowmobiles ruined it) The closest I have come to that is when skiing early in the morning in Killington, on subzero days, when you get to the top of the mountain, there is a quiet that covers everything like a warm blanket. It is amazing.

Very well articulated response. Thanks for the civility. Perhaps the solution is similar to that of "backwoods" verses campsite in the parks where there might be areas where drones would be permitted on a regular basis or perhaps we could Drone Wednesdays. I am sure a reasonably solution could be reached so that all would enjoy the beauty and splendor of the parks. They are, after all, for all of us to share and when Teddy Roosevelt started the national parks idea there were no jetskis or snowmobiles, yet we have adjusted to accommodate both. This should be no different.

 

[covpack]

The issue is that their are only 60 designated national parks. MOST of the lands NPS control are not designated national parks but fall under their control. As such the National Park Service sweeping drone band applies to 13 National Monuments, 21 National Preserves, National Historic Parks (31), 88 National historic sites, 4 national battlefields parks, 10(ish) national military parks, 11(ish) national battlefields, 21 national memorials, 18 national recreation areas, 10 national seashores, four national lakeshores, 5 national rivers, 3 national reserves, 10 national parkways, 20 plus naitonal historie and scenic trails, 14 national cemeteries, dozen of sites in the national capital. Most the land NPS control are not national parks.

Heck, in northern part of Las Vegas, they even control a few hundred acres of a wash where some mammoth bones were found - Tule Springs Fossel Beds. Basicallly, an old wash where it would be difficult to build houses due to flash floods. There is not wildlife or solitude, as part of it is also designated class B airspace, high powered power lines run through it and off roaders and hikers have used it for years, if not still. Looks just like another large track of land in the valley that has yet to be developed.

My complaint is with NPS banning drones in National Recreation Areas. National recreation areas have a different designation. As such loud the beauty and solidute that might be afforded national parks is not found in National RECREATION areas. Mission for recreation areas is for people to recreate. My complaint is NPS Lake Mead National Recreation Area, which covers more than 1.5 million acres along the Colorado River. I have spoken to the NPS headquarters about the park and drones and they brag that they had set aside and area for RC modelers 1991. It is not conducive for drone photography.

Strange thing is you have loud jet skis, house boats, RVs with loud generators, off road vehicles, commercial paddle boats, tour helicopters and every conceivable obnoxious not environmental friendly activity going on in the populated of the lake. Add that to the drunks, cliff divers, bikini class women and party goers it is not a "nature loving moment". In fact, people also live at Lake Mead. However, better not fly a drone.

NPS needs to at least evaluate the drone policy for national recreation areas and rivers.

 

[ac0j]

The issue is that their are only 60 designated national parks. MOST of the lands NPS control are not designated national parks but fall under their control. As such the National Park Service sweeping drone band applies to 13 National Monuments, 21 National Preserves, National Historic Parks (31), 88 National historic sites, 4 national battlefields parks, 10(ish) national military parks, 11(ish) national battlefields, 21 national memorials, 18 national recreation areas, 10 national seashores, four national lakeshores, 5 national rivers, 3 national reserves, 10 national parkways, 20 plus naitonal historie and scenic trails, 14 national cemeteries, dozen of sites in the national capital. Most the land NPS control are not national parks.

My complaint is with NPS banning drones in National Recreation Areas. National recreation areas have a different designation. As such loud the beauty and solidute that might be afforded national parks is not found in National RECREATION areas. Mission for recreation areas is for people to recreate. My complaint is NPS Lake Mead National Recreation Area, which covers more than 1.5 million acres along the Colorado River. I have spoken to the NPS headquarters about the park and drones and they brag that they had set aside and area for RC modelers 1991. It is not conducive for drone photography.

Strange thing is you have loud jet skis, house boats, RVs with loud generators, off road vehicles, commercial paddle boats, tour helicopters and every conceivable obnoxious not environmental friendly activity going on in the populated of the lake. Add that to the drunks and party goers it is not a "nature loving moment". In fact, people also live at Lake Mead. However, better not fly a drone.

NPS needs to at least evaluate the drone policy for national recreation areas and rivers.

Sounds like where you want to fly there is a lot of people........

 

[ColinF]

Yes, but fees don't collect themselves, and checking that those fees have been paid takes manpower. Commercial and other non-recreational flying is already possible by arrangement with Park superintendents. And if the NPS were to poll public opinion on recreational drones in parks, I doubt that we would win the vote.

Could you elaborate on how non-recreational flights are allowed? My research found there was no available process to apply for small commercial operations. (The obvious exceptions are deep pocketed large corporate production companies.)

 

[ColinF]

Very well articulated response. Thanks for the civility. Perhaps the solution is similar to that of "backwoods" verses campsite in the parks where there might be areas where drones would be permitted on a regular basis or perhaps we could Drone Wednesdays. I am sure a reasonably solution could be reached so that all would enjoy the beauty and splendor of the parks. They are, after all, for all of us to share and when Teddy Roosevelt started the national parks idea there were no jetskis or snowmobiles, yet we have adjusted to accommodate both. This should be no different.

Great suggestions!

 

[ColinF]

The issue is that their are only 60 designated national parks. MOST of the lands NPS control are not designated national parks but fall under their control. As such the National Park Service sweeping drone band applies to 13 National Monuments, 21 National Preserves, National Historic Parks (31), 88 National historic sites, 4 national battlefields parks, 10(ish) national military parks, 11(ish) national battlefields, 21 national memorials, 18 national recreation areas, 10 national seashores, four national lakeshores, 5 national rivers, 3 national reserves, 10 national parkways, 20 plus naitonal historie and scenic trails, 14 national cemeteries, dozen of sites in the national capital. Most the land NPS control are not national parks.

Heck, in northern part of Las Vegas, they even control a few hundred acres of a wash where some mammoth bones were found - Tule Springs Fossel Beds. Basicallly, an old wash where it would be difficult to build houses due to flash floods. There is not wildlife or solitude, as part of it is also designated class B airspace, high powered power lines run through it and off roaders and hikers have used it for years, if not still. Looks just like another large track of land in the valley that has yet to be developed.

My complaint is with NPS banning drones in National Recreation Areas. National recreation areas have a different designation. As such loud the beauty and solidute that might be afforded national parks is not found in National RECREATION areas. Mission for recreation areas is for people to recreate. My complaint is NPS Lake Mead National Recreation Area, which covers more than 1.5 million acres along the Colorado River. I have spoken to the NPS headquarters about the park and drones and they brag that they had set aside and area for RC modelers 1991. It is not conducive for drone photography.

Strange thing is you have loud jet skis, house boats, RVs with loud generators, off road vehicles, commercial paddle boats, tour helicopters and every conceivable obnoxious not environmental friendly activity going on in the populated of the lake. Add that to the drunks, cliff divers, bikini class women and party goers it is not a "nature loving moment". In fact, people also live at Lake Mead. However, better not fly a drone.

NPS needs to at least evaluate the drone policy for national recreation areas and rivers.

Spot on. The ban is way too sweeping. It is also very poorly worded. If you were at lake mead and one of your children pulled out a small toy drone and flew it in your campsite, in your boat, anywhere, they just committed a misdemeanor offense. It needs to be reviewed and updated.

 

[sar104]

Could you elaborate on how non-recreational flights are allowed? My research found there was no available process to apply for small commercial operations. (The obvious exceptions are deep pocketed large corporate production companies.)

There's no specific process but the Park Superintendents have the discretion to authorize flights, for example for search and rescue, academic research or, probably, video production companies.

 

[ac0j]

Spot on. The ban is way too sweeping. It is also very poorly worded. If you were at lake mead and one of your children pulled out a small toy drone and flew it in your campsite, in your boat, anywhere, they just committed a misdemeanor offense. It needs to be reviewed and updated.

Small toy drones are not included in FAA or bans or rules. Mavics are JUST big enough to be treated as "COMMERCIAL" UAV's
LOL! ( that goofs me every time I think about it.....ridiculous, IMO)
You can get some pretty capable Symas that are NOT considered registerable. I doubt the park services would allow anything that could be considered a drone, but one could argue if the FAA doesnt consider them, neither should the Park service. But if I remember correctly, the ban is against "model aircraft" not just drones specifically.

 

[ColinF]

Small toy drones are not included in FAA or bans or rules. Mavics are JUST big enough to be treated as "COMMERCIAL" UAV's
LOL! ( that goofs me every time I think about it.....ridiculous, IMO)
You can get some pretty capable Symas that are NOT considered registerable. I doubt the park services would allow anything that could be considered a drone, but one could argue if the FAA doesnt consider them, neither should the Park service. But if I remember correctly, the ban is against "model aircraft" not just drones specifically.

Respectfully, you are not correct. The FAA and the NPS are two different regulatory agencies with separate authority. The FAA does not ban flights over National Parks. The NPS bans drone operation in National Parks (but not the airspace over a National Park, as the FAA is the only agency that has regulatory authority over airspace.) My point is specific to the NPS regulations. Please point to where in the NPS memorandum it defines what is included or not included in the definition of a drone. (This is not the FAA regs where .55 to 55 lbs are the definition.) Further, there is a legal analysis that was done by Gregory S McNeal in his Forbes article, Six Months in Jail, According to What Law. He is an attorney, professor and respected industry expert, in fact cofounder if AirMap. He made this exact point about how poorly worded the NPS memorandum is.

 

[ac0j]

Respectfully, you are not correct. The FAA and the NPS are two different regulatory agencies with separate authority. My point is specific to the NPS regulations. Please point to where in the NPS memorandum it defines what is included or not included in the definition of a drone. (This is not the FAA regs where .55 to 55 lbs are the definition.) it is not there. Further, there is a legal analysis that was done by Gregory S McNeal in his Forbes article, Six Months in Jail, According to What Law. He is an attorney, professor and respected industry expert, in fact cofounder if AirMap. He made this exact point about how poorly worded the memorandum is.

You basically quoted me, (with better sentence structure and grammar) then told me I was wrong...?
I said, FAA does NOT consider a small toy drone a model that needs to be registered, there fore not controlled by the FAA, I Then (basically) said that I doubt the NPS would think the same way, as their ban is against all model aircraft and RC vehicles in general. (in the releases I have read)

 

[ColinF]

You basically quoted me, (with better sentence structure and grammar) then told me I was wrong...?
I said, FAA does NOT consider a small toy drone a model that needs to be registered, there fore not controlled by the FAA, I Then (basically) said that I doubt the NPS would think the same way, as their ban is against all model aircraft and RC vehicles in general. (in the releases I have read)

Please accept my apologies. I misread your statement. I stand corrected.

With that said, the article is a great read.... Six Months In Jail For Drones In Parks, According To What Law?

 

[Imtnbike]

And I’m still waiting to see one piece evidence that anyone or any wildlife was disturbed..... anything? Anyone?

Three minute search...

ViralViral Video of the Persistent Baby Bear Hides a Dark Technological Subtext a Dark Technological Subtext | Inverse

 

[tcope]

Interesting analogy, but the premise is faulty. I don’t believe allowing controlled access is “hitting” anyone in any way. Your premise supports your position, that any access is bad. I, respectfully, disagree.

You are allowed to fly in an area where people want to enjoy the serenity of the landscape. That is like hitting them.

 

[ColinF]

You are allowed to fly in an area where people want to enjoy the serenity of the landscape. That is like hitting them.

Not something I support. Straw man argument again.

 

[tcope]

Not something I support. Straw man argument again.

You seem to like claiming everything is a "strawman argument".... when it's clearly not.

You say people should be allowed to fly in NP on a limited basis. I point out that a this simply means the annoyance and problems will be on a limited basis. It does not negate the problem. if you think I was not addressing your point (strawman argument), you may want to better understand the phrase.

 

[ColinF]

You seem to like claiming everything is a "strawman argument".... when it's clearly not.

You say people should be allowed to fly in NP on a limited basis. I point out that a this simply means the annoyance and problems will be on a limited basis. It does not negate the problem. if you think I was not addressing your point (strawman argument), you may want to better understand the phrase.

Here is my point. The premise implies first that people are everywhere at all times. They are not. The statement is made that flying where people want serenity is like hitting someone. Well if they do not fly where people are actively seeking serenity, they are hitting no one. I am suggesting compromise and my compromise is limited access. I have stated it again and again. The majority of people (with a couple exceptions) who don’t believe in access take the argument to the extreme... Drones by the hundreds. Drones harassing wildlife. Drones harassing people. There are remote areas of parks. There are off season and low traffic times, there is geofencing. What I would ask, respectfully, is that it is fine that you don’t want drones in any parks at anytime, period, but please don’t attribute to me an argument based on something that i am not stating. That is the essence of the strawman.

 

[rmb]

The parks are for all of us not just the people who enjoy peace and quiet. Why should any one group get preference?

I’m afraid I need to respectfully disagree with that statement as it not a far exchange. I can enjoy my peace and quiet without taking away from your experience, but you can not be loud without taking away from mine. Also if ones activities or hobby requires making noise (like us drone ops) there are literally a million places where we can go to enjoy that, but if I want quite there will never be a place to go if we continue to erode the already few public places where that is possible. Especially if we do it under the guise of being “fair” to everyone.
Just a thought

 

[ColinF]

I’m afraid I need to respectfully disagree with that statement as it not a far exchange. I can enjoy my peace and quiet without taking away from your experience, but you can not be loud without taking away from mine. Also if ones activities or hobby requires making noise (like us drone ops) there are literally a million places where we can go to enjoy that, but if I want quite there will never be a place to go if we continue to erode the already few public places where that is possible. Especially if we do it under the guise of being “fair” to everyone.
Just a thought

You bring civility to this debate. Thank you! (You are almost winning me over... almost)

 

[W2EJ]

Unfortunately these days I have been doing lest nature and more commercial work, and like a lot of us my Reel is way out of date. That said you are more than welcome to watch what I have.

That was a super, well done video. I loved it!

 

[rmb]

That was a super, well done video. I loved it!

Thank you W2EJ. I very much appreciate you taking the time to watch!