DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

We are just hurting ourselves... Wildlife harassment, illegal flights on campus, and BVLOS flights.. all in ONE

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regardless of how they word it, they are only able to control "Land Use" and not any Airspace Use.
They stated 'campus community' which is generally staff, faculty and students. Must uni's have codes of conduct for each of these groups which terms of employment/enrollment can be based on abiding by. They cannot violate constitutional law with the code but they can likely say that 'members of the community' are not allowed to fly drones over the campus as a term of their employment/enrollment.

The day someone no longer has a relationship with the uni then they can fly over the campus.

Otherwise I totally agree with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thispilothere
This one article sums up a lot of FAULTS all in one flight...

  • Harassing Wildlife (intentionally and otherwise)
  • Flying on Campus without permission or in a manner that violates the Campus UAS Rules
  • Flying by "Viewing Device Only" and BVLOS

And we're shocked that regulations are getting tougher and more locations are prohibiting any UAS flights from their property. If we can't Police ourselves we leave it up to John Q. Public to pitch a fit and demand that Government do it for us. We are better than this . . .

A lot of assumptions are being made in this story.
1) Harassing wildlife. Flying in the vicinity of widelife is not harrassment. It could be the pilot was unaware of the presence of these birds, but it does not automatically mean he was intentionally harrassing. Why do the drone police always seem to assume negativity toward drone pilots? Why do we assume a drone is always an invader. It has every right that any other flying bird has. No, I don't think we should be harrassing birds and wildlife, but often we fly in the vicinity to capture video of wildlife for documentation purposes.
2) Flying on campus without permission or in a manner that violates the campus UAS rules. We all know the FAA manages airspace and is the defacto regulator. How would a drone pilot know the campus has regulations that affect him/her unless their is signage to indicate such, and that should be the schools responsibility to posts signs.
3) Flying by "Viewing Device Only" and BVLOS. I will guarantee nearly 90% of us who fly will ocassionally use our screen to fly. Why, because of flying with similar colored backgrounds will make your drone seem to disappear, making the screen the safer alternative of flying blind. Color blind people often have this problem. Sun glare is also a problem. To make a blanket statement you should never fly by viewing device only doesn't make common sense.
 
This one article sums up a lot of FAULTS all in one flight...

  • Harassing Wildlife (intentionally and otherwise)
  • Flying on Campus without permission or in a manner that violates the Campus UAS Rules
  • Flying by "Viewing Device Only" and BVLOS

And we're shocked that regulations are getting tougher and more locations are prohibiting any UAS flights from their property. If we can't Police ourselves we leave it up to John Q. Public to pitch a fit and demand that Government do it for us. We are better than this . . .

Harassing wildlife is Evil, and anyone who does it should be punished by being required to eat their drone, with the motors running.

I have zero tolerance for animal cruelty.

TCS
 
A lot of assumptions are being made in this story.
1) Harassing wildlife. Flying in the vicinity of widelife is not harrassment. It could be the pilot was unaware of the presence of these birds, but it does not automatically mean he was intentionally harrassing. Why do the drone police always seem to assume negativity toward drone pilots? Why do we assume a drone is always an invader. It has every right that any other flying bird has. No, I don't think we should be harrassing birds and wildlife, but often we fly in the vicinity to capture video of wildlife for documentation purposes.
2) Flying on campus without permission or in a manner that violates the campus UAS rules. We all know the FAA manages airspace and is the defacto regulator. How would a drone pilot know the campus has regulations that affect him/her unless their is signage to indicate such, and that should be the schools responsibility to posts signs.
3) Flying by "Viewing Device Only" and BVLOS. I will guarantee nearly 90% of us who fly will ocassionally use our screen to fly. Why, because of flying with similar colored backgrounds will make your drone seem to disappear, making the screen the safer alternative of flying blind. Color blind people often have this problem. Sun glare is also a problem. To make a blanket statement you should never fly by viewing device only doesn't make common sense.

1) a - Regardless if they INTEND to harass wildlife if their actions cause the wildlife to change their actions they are indeed harassing even if unintentional. The DRONE POLICE jump on this because actions like this make it a LOT harder on the rest of us. I come from a time when there were almost ZERO UAS regulations and now I have to follow rules that only help to enforce COMMON SENSE!! I take it very seriously!!
1) b - What a rude and incorrect statement to say that a drone has the same right as a nesting bird. You're horribly wrong there on many cases.
1) c- Just because we CAN fly somewhere doesn't mean it's the right thing. Most of the time our goal is to document wildlife "as it is" instead of causing alarm or worse causing them to up and leave a nest. Anything less is simply wrong and rude.

2) a - Flying ON campus - It's not an FAA thing but the LAND OWNER/MANAGER rights situation and has NOTHIGN to do with the FAA. Land Use Rights are very much a local and REAL thing that is legal and upheld. To think you can walk just anywhere in the country and do what you want is again rude and grossly inaccurate. You're confusing Land Use Right with Airspace Authority and they are VERY different animals but both are valid.
2) b - Why would a pilot think it's ok to walk on someone's property to do WHATEVER without inquiring? Especially flying a UAS which is such a Lightning Rod topic anyway. We have a moral responsibly to do the right thing!

3) Merely looking down at your viewing device is allowed and even CODIFIED in the Regulations but flying in a manner to where the RPIC can't actually see the aircraft is a direct VIOLATION of those same Federal Regulations. You're comparing apples to monkeys. There is NO excuse for flying in a manner where you can't see the aircraft and the AIRSPACE around it. It's blatant reckless behavior. To even suggest you you have is nothing less than laughable.
 
It could be the pilot was unaware of the presence of these birds
The pilot is responsible for knowing the surroundings where they are flying.

2) Flying on campus without permission or in a manner that violates the campus UAS rules. We all know the FAA manages airspace and is the defacto regulator. How would a drone pilot know the campus has regulations that affect him/her unless their is signage to indicate such, and that should be the schools responsibility to posts signs.
See my reply above. Staff, Faculty and Students would be aware if they signed a code of conduct.
 
A lot of assumptions are being made in this story.
1) Harassing wildlife. Flying in the vicinity of widelife is not harrassment. It could be the pilot was unaware of the presence of these birds, but it does not automatically mean he was intentionally harrassing.
It was harassment whether or not the pilot intended it.
Why do the drone police always seem to assume negativity toward drone pilots? Why do we assume a drone is always an invader. It has every right that any other flying bird has.
You cannot be serious.
No, I don't think we should be harrassing birds and wildlife, but often we fly in the vicinity to capture video of wildlife for documentation purposes.
Documentation purposes? Who is "we"?
2) Flying on campus without permission or in a manner that violates the campus UAS rules. We all know the FAA manages airspace and is the defacto regulator. How would a drone pilot know the campus has regulations that affect him/her unless their is signage to indicate such, and that should be the schools responsibility to posts signs.
It's clearly documented in campus policy. Anyone studying or working there is expected to know that. Anyone else shouldn't be flying a drone from private property without asking first.
3) Flying by "Viewing Device Only" and BVLOS. I will guarantee nearly 90% of us who fly will ocassionally use our screen to fly. Why, because of flying with similar colored backgrounds will make your drone seem to disappear, making the screen the safer alternative of flying blind. Color blind people often have this problem. Sun glare is also a problem. To make a blanket statement you should never fly by viewing device only doesn't make common sense.
It's not a blanket statement - it's the law, and your concept of what is and isn't common sense is completely irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Anyone else shouldn't be flying a drone from private property without asking first.

Shouldn't be as in common courtesy or shouldn't be by any regulatory statute? What about flying over and around the campus but take-off/landing from adjacent public property?
 
1) a - Regardless if they INTEND to harass wildlife if their actions cause the wildlife to change their actions they are indeed harassing even if unintentional. The DRONE POLICE jump on this because actions like this make it a LOT harder on the rest of us. I come from a time when there were almost ZERO UAS regulations and now I have to follow rules that only help to enforce COMMON SENSE!! I take it very seriously!!
1) b - What a rude and incorrect statement to say that a drone has the same right as a nesting bird. You're horribly wrong there on many cases.
1) c- Just because we CAN fly somewhere doesn't mean it's the right thing. Most of the time our goal is to document wildlife "as it is" instead of causing alarm or worse causing them to up and leave a nest. Anything less is simply wrong and rude.

2) a - Flying ON campus - It's not an FAA thing but the LAND OWNER/MANAGER rights situation and has NOTHIGN to do with the FAA. Land Use Rights are very much a local and REAL thing that is legal and upheld. To think you can walk just anywhere in the country and do what you want is again rude and grossly inaccurate. You're confusing Land Use Right with Airspace Authority and they are VERY different animals but both are valid.
2) b - Why would a pilot think it's ok to walk on someone's property to do WHATEVER without inquiring? Especially flying a UAS which is such a Lightning Rod topic anyway. We have a moral responsibly to do the right thing!

3) Merely looking down at your viewing device is allowed and even CODIFIED in the Regulations but flying in a manner to where the RPIC can't actually see the aircraft is a direct VIOLATION of those same Federal Regulations. You're comparing apples to monkeys. There is NO excuse for flying in a manner where you can't see the aircraft and the AIRSPACE around it. It's blatant reckless behavior. To even suggest you you have is nothing less than laughable.
You being the administrator probably means I won't win this argument, but I would like to counter your remarks.
1) a - there isn't a bit of airspace you can fly without affecting wildlife, so with that said you would never fly your drone at all. If we lived by your rule, narry a drone, helicopter, airplane or rocket would ever leave the ground. I understand and agree that we should not harrass wildlife, but to suggest we never fly if our flight would change their actions is crazy. The reasons cities, counties, states make a blanket rule forbidding drones to fly is so they don't have to deal with it, plain and simple. They don't have to deal with drones mishaps or the complaints from the over zealous public might make. They don't have to have a reason. Can you imagine back in the old western days if people complained about railroads being built because they destroyed the habitats of rabbits, snakes and other land animals and created to much noise, so we should just ban them? Same analogy.
1) b - you are the administrator, but what makes you correct by saying that a bird, rabbit or any other wildlife has any more right to be in the wild as a drone? Is it because of the noise? Why should wildlife have dominance over a drone's presence? This unique flying gadget is an extension of the pilot, to view the world from a variety of unique locations made available by it's unique capability.
1) c - If we can fly there, then why not do so within reason? Should we disturb a family of nesting birds by flying right on top of their nest, I would say no. But, in a particular case shown by video, drones were dispatched to feed an injured eagle in it's home upon a high cliff by feeding it daily. Is that destructive? Is it wrong to set a flock of ducks swimming, a pack of wolves running, a herd of horses running. All these animals are equipped to take flight when they sense danger, whether it be a natural preditor or a drone. We are not harming those animals.
2) a/b - Flying while piloting on campus can be regulated by the land owner, this is true. Step one foot off campus and that right evaporates. FAA has jurisdicition over airspace. Do you seek permission every where you fly? Not likely. If it's private property you probably might. If the property owner allows access to the public, yet doesn't want any drone flying, they have an obligation to place signs alerting you to the fact. Piloting a drone creates a lot of interests because most have no idea what it can do or see. There is a misconception that we can see everywhere when in fact with wide angle lenses, we see a lot of landscape.

Crying foul everytime a drone takes to the air needs to be countered with some common sense. We have rights just like the general public and education is the best way to handle this. Zealouts are everywhere.
 
Harassing? Don't tell anyone, but I've killed wildlife. Cute ones too like Bambi and Thumper. I didn't even eat them, I did it for sport. You should see the trophies!

Also, I just took my latest video flying in formation with geese. Awesome footage.
 
On general I feel the basic common sense on this is to treat sensitive wildlife / wildlife situations like you would when you become aware of a manned aircraft entering the same airspace as your drone.

Avoid, move away, decrease / increase altitude, land, whatever you need to do to avoid a situation that arises.

You certainly can’t foresee many wildlife encounters, raptor type encounters can be very fast and of course they very often attack drones, protecting their ‘patch’ from what looks like a rival.

If you see one flying in the distance though, give it a wide berth.
 
Harassing? Don't tell anyone, but I've killed wildlife. Cute ones too like Bambi and Thumper. I didn't even eat them, I did it for sport. You should see the trophies!

Also, I just took my latest video flying in formation with geese. Awesome footage.


I've also hunted although not purely for sport. That's a whole different set of rules as many animals would soon expire without proper herd management. You're not even in the ballpark of being reasonable on this one.
 
You being the administrator probably means I won't win this argument, but I would like to counter your remarks.
1) a - there isn't a bit of airspace you can fly without affecting wildlife, so with that said you would never fly your drone at all. If we lived by your rule, narry a drone, helicopter, airplane or rocket would ever leave the ground. I understand and agree that we should not harrass wildlife, but to suggest we never fly if our flight would change their actions is crazy. The reasons cities, counties, states make a blanket rule forbidding drones to fly is so they don't have to deal with it, plain and simple. They don't have to deal with drones mishaps or the complaints from the over zealous public might make. They don't have to have a reason. Can you imagine back in the old western days if people complained about railroads being built because they destroyed the habitats of rabbits, snakes and other land animals and created to much noise, so we should just ban them? Same analogy.
1) b - you are the administrator, but what makes you correct by saying that a bird, rabbit or any other wildlife has any more right to be in the wild as a drone? Is it because of the noise? Why should wildlife have dominance over a drone's presence? This unique flying gadget is an extension of the pilot, to view the world from a variety of unique locations made available by it's unique capability.
1) c - If we can fly there, then why not do so within reason? Should we disturb a family of nesting birds by flying right on top of their nest, I would say no. But, in a particular case shown by video, drones were dispatched to feed an injured eagle in it's home upon a high cliff by feeding it daily. Is that destructive? Is it wrong to set a flock of ducks swimming, a pack of wolves running, a herd of horses running. All these animals are equipped to take flight when they sense danger, whether it be a natural preditor or a drone. We are not harming those animals.
2) a/b - Flying while piloting on campus can be regulated by the land owner, this is true. Step one foot off campus and that right evaporates. FAA has jurisdicition over airspace. Do you seek permission every where you fly? Not likely. If it's private property you probably might. If the property owner allows access to the public, yet doesn't want any drone flying, they have an obligation to place signs alerting you to the fact. Piloting a drone creates a lot of interests because most have no idea what it can do or see. There is a misconception that we can see everywhere when in fact with wide angle lenses, we see a lot of landscape.

Crying foul everytime a drone takes to the air needs to be countered with some common sense. We have rights just like the general public and education is the best way to handle this. Zealouts are everywhere.

No it has nothing to do with being ADMIN here. It has to do with over 4 decades of UAS and Manned Aviation experience and working in the Aviation Community for many many years. The FAA searched me out to join their FAA Safety Team for a reason . . . and it's not because I feel like I have some undeniable "RIGHT" to fly my toy UAS anywhere I want to with NO regard for anyone else or any other living thing.

I'm done arguing with you because all of the facts are already pointed out yet you just refuse to accept them. What you do with your UAS is up to you and if you break the rules that's on you and only you.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dirkclod
On general I feel the basic common sense on this is to treat sensitive wildlife / wildlife situations like you would when you become aware of a manned aircraft entering the same airspace as your drone.

Avoid, move away, decrease / increase altitude, land, whatever you need to do to avoid a situation that arises.

You certainly can’t foresee many wildlife encounters, raptor type encounters can be very fast and of course they very often attack drones, protecting their ‘patch’ from what looks like a rival.

If you see one flying in the distance though, give it a wide berth.

"... they very often attack drones..."

I've heard of only two instances where a bird actually attacked a drone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thispilothere
"... they very often attack drones..."

I've heard of only two instances where a bird actually attacked a drone.

I've heard of several cases that seemed like the drone was attacked but nothing was confirmed.

I've flown with circling hawks and they were completely unimpressed and never reacted. The geese I just flew with didn't deviate or act unusual at all. Horses don't even look up when I'm just above their heads. I had a dog bark once but I haven't seen any evidence of animals being harassed by my flying.
 
"... they very often attack drones..."

I've heard of only two instances where a bird actually attacked a drone.
Here’s one of them. The camera on this drone is capable of continuous 360 degree panning so it stays trained on the scene even though the aircraft is spinning as it recovers from the broken arm. This is a hex drone that goes into 5 rotor mode after the arm is broken and the motor shuts down.
 
Here’s one of them. The camera on this drone is capable of continuous 360 degree panning so it stays trained on the scene even though the aircraft is spinning as it recovers from the broken arm. This is a hex drone that goes into 5 rotor mode after the arm is broken and the motor shuts down.
I'm assuming the pilot saw the bird contact the drone. I didn't know those hex-motored drones could fly with five motors spinning. That gimbal is really impressive, being able to maintain it's stability with all that going on.
 
"... they very often attack drones..."

I've heard of only two instances where a bird actually attacked a drone.

YouTube has numerous eagle encounters / strikes, all manner of varieties worldwide.
Larger other species like hawks, falcons, etc, no doubt they would attack.
They are very territorial and would probably see drones as other raptors, given their general size.

Searched youtube for > eagle drone attack < and got many with those, and hawks, kites, etc, then a heap of other bird variety encounters with drones came up too.
 
YouTube has numerous eagle encounters / strikes, all manner of varieties worldwide.
Larger other species like hawks, falcons, etc, no doubt they would attack.
They are very territorial and would probably see drones as other raptors, given their general size.

Searched youtube for > eagle drone attack < and got many with those, and hawks, kites, etc, then a heap of other bird variety encounters with drones came up too.

Yes, there are videos of encounters that are called attacks, but few actual attacks where the bird intentionally contacted the drone.
 
Yes, there are videos of encounters that are called attacks, but few actual attacks where the bird intentionally contacted the drone.

A few drone downings for sure, those videos have been around for a while.
Phantoms seemed to be very popular, ha ha.

I'd call an encounter a fleeting event, an encounter requires no action, it's done.

An attack on the other hand is more a continued attempt to intercept the intruder (drone), where a pilot has to repeatedly attempt to escape the situation to avoid contact.

Had my own meeting with a Peregrine Falcon in the remote Pilbara of Australia a few years ago, took a while to even see it on screen, in replay I was able to edit the brief (fast !) passes.
I just went straight up fast then and retreated, leaving the falcon to it's rocky outcrop nesting spot.

 
Mankind has always had its share of idiots, and for a long time I thought we had a higher percentage of idiots than ever? But now I wonder if we just have more idiots overall because of the higher population and the internet giving them their very own stage to demonstrate their idiocy?
Higher population density yields a higher density of idiots. Just another of the many Evils of high population density.

:)

Thx!

TCS
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,593
Messages
1,554,199
Members
159,598
Latest member
fast54