What Would You Do?

[Torque]

I for one wouldn't. Are you suggesting you can maintain VLOS at 2 miles? In any case, the GSM NP video is a perfect example of why your idea is DOA - the road and the parking lot are just hundreds of feet from that herd.


Regardless of what anyone, or any sign says, the sound/noise of a drone is NOT why we can't fly in NPs. A lot of folks who fly drones like to make that claim so their argument seems stronger.

The majority of drone pilots make their own rules, and rely on their own personal judgement when flying, as evidenced in this forum and these threads, thus they can be expected to follow no rules. So no drones in NPs.

Excellent reply.

 

[tlyons]

Actually, it's the other way around. It's not controlled airspace. The National Park Service (manages the land on behalf of us citizen owners) prohibits operating drones from National Parks. It's legal to fly over a National Park if you launch outside the park boundary and maintain VLOS.

You're right about wildlife disturbance regulation. I wasn't aware that there was a minimum distance specified. That's good to know.

Well, that's a surprise. The 2014 Policy Memorandum 14-05 said "prohibit the launching, landing, or operation of unmanned aircraft," which has been modified to "applies to the launching, landing, and operation of unmanned aircraft on lands and waters administered by the NPS" which is more consistent with the FAA's other rules and authority.

Hmmm. I can now stand on the edge of the White Mountains and take a look with my drone legally. Better, at least the White Mountains is criss crossed with public roads that aren't part of the forest or park in several places.

Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[mavic3usa]

I don't make the rules. But, the NPS is highly unlikely to adopt such a difficult-to-enforce regulation. Regulations that can't be easily enforced are not effective. The "no drones" rule is as simple as it gets.

How difficult is it to enforce my overnight camping in the backcountry rules that you see in so many parks? Should they just say nobody can go in the backcountry because they are unable to or it's difficult to make sure nobody camps back there? If it is that hard to figure out how to put rules in place the are not impossible to enforce, all they have to do is call me; I can help them put those rules into place in under a week.

Yes, you might not see the group of hikers 200 yards below you on the rim trail. Or the folks stopped at the next turnoff who are sitting quietly and enjoying the tranquility of the place.

I'm not sure where you are talking about so I'll just say in response wherever the public expects peace and tranquility, my drone will be prohibit. And I hope cars, trucks and other loud vehicles like motorcycles are prohibited as well because their sounds carries further than my drone can fly. All I am asking is to fly the drone in the same place where the noise already *is* as long as the argument is about the noise. I get it people want peace and tranquility but you can have that in every square inch of the park. All I am asking for is 1% or less of the NPS to be a tiny bit less than absolute peace and tranquility....you know, that same concessions they made for cars and motorcycles.

If you're bothered by motorcycle noise in the National Parks, by all means try to "push back" in favor of a change in regulations. But motorcycle noise isn't relevant to a drone forum.

I'm not bothered by motorcycle noise in the NP because it's temporary and I know where to go in the Park to find peace without depriving others of their enjoyment of the Park. I would never ask the Park to close down the North-South road to motorcycle noise just because I wanted to peacefully walk down that road. However, I would ask them not to build a new East-West road that takes traffic into the remote parts of the park. When the time is right, we'll push back. I'm thinking it will happen sooner than later.

 

[mavic3usa]

View attachment 170040
The only 4 flight zones in the GC, reserved for all the tourists flights. Drones will never be allowed.

I'm asking for 1 or 2 dedicated (small) drone flight zones in the GC. And would like to reserve 1 of the tourist flight zones for "drones only" on Saturdays (each one for one Saturday so that's 4 for the month) from 8am to noon. No tourist helicopters in that zone for 4 hours on Saturday mornings.

 

[mavic3usa]

I for one wouldn't. Are you suggesting you can maintain VLOS at 2 miles? In any case, the GSM NP video is a perfect example of why your idea is DOA - the road and the parking lot are just hundreds of feet from that herd.

No it's just an example, we can work on the actual numbers. What I meant with 2 miles means if you go more than 150 feet from the road, you still can't fly any further than 2 miles from the road. Someone might want to take a trail leading off the main road for 1 mile in which will leave them only 1 more mile to work with as long as they are VLOS. When VLOS is lifted, happy to make this limit 3 miles. But I thought there is plenty of road noise for at least 2 miles away from the highway and anyone hiking or camping in the area are not likely to expect peace and quiet. Obviously this boundary is set up for remote roads only and is nowhere near the entrance or the parking lot or the Park hq or other special places like geysers or monuments or favorite animal hangouts, etc. It's not the entire length of every road.

Just like with any Park activity, you must check in at the Park entrance and you can get a map outlining the areas. Drone flyers are responsible just like hikers and hunters and people who go backcountry hiking and the same methods for them can apply to us as well. This can even change daily.

 

[mavic3usa]

Regardless of what anyone, or any sign says, the sound/noise of a drone is NOT why we can't fly in NPs. A lot of folks who fly drones like to make that claim so their argument seems stronger.

The majority of drone pilots make their own rules, and rely on their own personal judgement when flying, as evidenced in this forum and these threads, thus they can be expected to follow no rules. So no drones in NPs.

Agreed, I don't think drone noise interrupting peace and quiet is a thing; happy to drop that argument and never bring it up again as long as everybody agrees. I won't bring it up if [you] don't bring it up.

The majority of backcountry hikers make their own rules, too. We have facts and we have proof of that. The NP are being destroyed and it's not by drones. Let me know when you are ready to ban people from going into the backcountry. Would love for your stance on them to be as strong as they are on drones.

*Backpackers are just the example, it's not just them. Substitute your appropriate NP activity as necessary.

 

[mavic3usa]

Well, that's a surprise. The 2014 Policy Memorandum 14-05 said "prohibit the launching, landing, or operation of unmanned aircraft," which has been modified to "applies to the launching, landing, and operation of unmanned aircraft on lands and waters administered by the NPS" which is more consistent with the FAA's other rules and authority.

Hmmm. I can now stand on the edge of the White Mountains and take a look with my drone legally. Better, at least the White Mountains is criss crossed with public roads that aren't part of the forest or park in several places.

Thanks for pointing that out.

That's going to be part of the strategy. Get more public roads into the NPS system where we can go without being subject to archaic and unfair NP rules. Drones will be the 100th, not the 1st, to try to adopt this strategy just in case anyone looks down on this.

And just for the record, I follow the NP rules. I just think some of them are unfair because they are outdated. All of my suggestions have safety first and foremost in mind. In 2010, we scored a major victory with regard to NPS and I believe it is possible with drones, too.

 

[Ty Pilot]

No it's just an example, we can work on the actual numbers. What I meant with 2 miles means if you go more than 150 feet from the road, you still can't fly any further than 2 miles from the road.

Not sure who 'we' is but no one has VLOS at 2 miles, or even 2 miles minus 150 feet. Two miles is 10,560 feet. No one has VLOS anywhere near that. But this is a moot point because no one would entertain such a rule change, certainly not the NPS.

Someone might want to take a trail leading off the main road for 1 mile in which will leave them only 1 more mile to work with as long as they are VLOS.

Again VLOS cannot be achieved with the size drones we fly, at the distances you're suggesting. Not two miles, not one mile, not one half a mile. Please see one of the hundreds of VLOS threads for clarification, but it is not having clear sky between you and the drone as so many like to imagine.

But I thought there is plenty of road noise for at least 2 miles away from the highway and anyone hiking or camping in the area are not likely to expect peace and quiet.

Again, drones were not banned from NPs because of their sound alone.

 

[Torque]

Get more public roads into the NPS system where we can go without being subject to archaic and unfair NP rules.

Yeah. Well thought out. A true protector of these lands.

 

[Ty Pilot]

Agreed, I don't think drone noise interrupting peace and quiet is a thing; happy to drop that argument and never bring it up again as long as everybody agrees.

Nope, I didn't say that - I said Noise is not the sole reason why drones are banned from NPs.

But apparently you don't agree with yourself, and are one of the folks I referred to; who use it (noise), as a strawman argument. An example is your post above (post #63), where two thirds of your response to @MS Coast - is about noise.

I won't bring it up if [you] don't bring it up.

I'll hold ya to it. But I will respond to anyone who tries that same argument, because it is disingenuous.

The majority of backcountry hikers make their own rules, too. We have facts and we have proof of that. The NP are being destroyed and it's not by drones. Let me know when you are ready to ban people from going into the backcountry. Would love for your stance on them to be as strong as they are on drones.

*Backpackers are just the example, it's not just them. Substitute your appropriate NP activity as necessary.

I am on a drone forum. Just because there are idiots of all types that visit National Parks does not mean I have to address them. I am addressing the community that I am a member of, I'm not going to make some twisted interpretation of standards to meet the lowest common denominators of society.

We should first hold ourselves to a higher standard, before we ask that the NPs do.

 

[mavic3usa]

Not sure who 'we' is but no one has VLOS at 2 miles, or even 2 miles minus 150 feet. Two miles is 10,560 feet. No one has VLOS anywhere near that. But this is a moot point because no one would entertain such a rule change, certainly not the NPS.


Again VLOS cannot be achieved with the size drones we fly, at the distances you're suggesting. Not two miles, not one mile, not one half a mile. Please see one of the hundreds of VLOS threads for clarification, but it is not having clear sky between you and the drone as so many like to imagine.

I'm describing the drone boundary, not the drone flight.

 

[mavic3usa]

Yeah. Well thought out. A true protector of these lands.

Because the rules in place right now are protecting the Parks? The suggestions I make will make the Parks better for everybody.

 

[Ty Pilot]

I'm describing the drone boundary, not the drone flight.

Ahhh, okay. So - you want to set the boundary that drones can fly - out to two miles from any road in the park - but this is just a boundary drones cannot pass, you're not saying their allowed to fly that far, just that - it is a boundary that drones cannot fly past. Got it. . . . . .

When VLOS is lifted, happy to make this limit 3 miles.

. . . .okay - so soon, it will be three miles for the boundary for drones. . . . . from any road in the park. . . . .Got it.

That's going to be part of the strategy. Get more public roads into the NPS system where we can go without being subject to archaic and unfair NP rules.

. . . .and of course - put more roads into the National parks, where we can set the boundary to three miles . . . . with the outcome being; that you can fly anywhere in an NP - VLOS or BVLOS or whatever . . . . Got It!

Drones will be the 100th, not the 1st, to try to adopt this strategy just in case anyone looks down on this.

And just for the record, I follow the NP rules. I just think some of them are unfair because they are outdated. All of my suggestions have safety first and foremost in mind. In 2010, we scored a major victory with regard to NPS and I believe it is possible with drones, too.

Inquiring minds want to know - who is this "we" and what was the major victory you scored in the NPS?

 

[MS Coast]

I'm asking for 1 or 2 dedicated (small) drone flight zones in the GC. And would like to reserve 1 of the tourist flight zones for "drones only" on Saturdays (each one for one Saturday so that's 4 for the month) from 8am to noon. No tourist helicopters in that zone for 4 hours on Saturday mornings.

That, or some variant, is a good suggestion.

 

[Amichael]

In my daily life, I work in marketing, advertising, Social Media, etc and every once in a while, I come across things like this video I will post below. It starts off nice, but within a short amount of time, I see there are some National Park NFZ flights happening. The most infuriating point happens at the 2:33 mark of the video, where the operator is flying over, around, and through a herd of North American Elk that are grazing in the morning at the Oconoluftee Visitor Center inside the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. I was surprised that the elk didn't react to the drone. Nonetheless, the video was sent to me from the father of the person who made it, thinking the organization I work with would "love it".

So, my question, what would you do with the video? Report the person, leave it, figure out who to send it to? I am not trying to be a narc or a tattletale, but this is such an egregious act that this individual needs to learn from. What would you do?

Idiot in Great Smoky Mountains National Park

I wouldn't post it here looking for a consensus to shame another pilot for breaking the rules. Perhaps you could have just reached out to the pilot and 'offered' some education on UAV rules and the perception of and on the community.

 

[mavic3usa]

Here's another suggestion.

Since anyone can stand outside the Park boundary and fly into the NPS airspace pretty much unrestricted, I suggest the NPS rein this in by establishing a two-mile buffer zone from the edge of the Park boundary that runs most of (not the entire) length of the Park boundary where reasonable. Drone flyer can enter that area and take off and land their drone while standing on NPS but they must keep their drone within VLOS (per the rules) and must not stray more than 2 miles from the Park boundary (which means if you walk in 2 miles, you probably can't fly any further into the Park).

This does several things:

1. Lessens the likelihood that pilots will stand outside the Park and then fly into the Park and over places where you don't want them to fly. Sure they can do this anyway but providing a "safe space" will help to limit this from happening.
2. Allows all visitors to enjoy the Park within reason and ordinary visitors will soon be aware of where the drones are....and aren't.
3. Allows me to stand on NPS property and not on the other public property or private property or the right-of-way or the state parks etc where I have to deal with state and local law enforcement and their rules. I know the FAA rules and the only officials that will approach me are Federal officials (park rangers) and they know the FAA rules, too. This means when I arrive in town, all I need to know are....FAA rules. The two-mile buffer will be a drone sanctuary but in reality, it will be mostly complete empty and uneventful.
4. Drone flyers will pay NPS fees, buy annual and lifetime permits, and fly responsibility and as this becomes familiar, it will be well known that you cannot fly over Mt Rushmore or over the geysers or over the parking lot in the middle of the park. Just like anything else, there are closed areas, obey the signage, Rangers give the orders.
5. This "concession" will avert or delay any future legal action or ruling that will likely open the entire Park to drones. I would rather fly restricted for the next 20 years than fly unrestricted for the last 10 of those years. Allows the NPS to put together a comprehensive drone plan including necessary special NPS rules and restrictions (i.e. night flying, etc) specific to each park and perhaps that include some Parks that are still no-drone zones and maybe even some Parks that are complete open. Similar rules to commercial photography, large or organized groups, etc still apply to NPS. Park fees and fines from violations, lost drones, etc. Maybe even put up LAANC-type authorization over the Park with 0s to 400s.
6. If I crash my drone, unless it is physically impossible to recover it, I can most likely make my way to it because I should be only flying over NPS. NPS will recover your drone for a fee. People who fly legally are way more likely to report a crashed or lost drone.
7. Drone flyers agree to "give way" to Park visitors just like they do for manned aircraft.
8. Revisit and revise the rules over time because things change.

 

[MS Coast]

I wouldn't post it here looking for a consensus to shame another pilot for breaking the rules. Perhaps you could have just reached out to the pilot and 'offered' some education on UAV rules and the perception of and on the community.

Being fair to the OP, I don't see that he tried to shame anyone.

"So, my question, what would you do with the video? Report the person, leave it, figure out who to send it to? I am not trying to be a narc or a tattletale, but this is such an egregious act that this individual needs to learn from. What would you do?"

He's suggesting that the pilot needed to be educated. He was asking for suggestions from the forum, not ranting and shaming. I commend him for being measured in his response and asking for input from others.

 

[Aerophile]

Just like with any Park activity, you must check in at the Park entrance and you can get a map outlining the areas. Drone flyers are responsible just like hikers and hunters and people who go backcountry hiking...

SOME drone flyers are certainly responsible. A great number of them are not.

So what percentage are the irresponsible rule-breakers? Hard to know, but I'd say the vast majority of drone footage that I've seen online (and I'd bet that most of what you all have also seen posted online) shows off flagrant violations of regulations. Nearly all the footage I see on YouTube seems to be candidates for the FAA's "don't ever do this" reel.

OTOH, Ive not seen a lot of footage online showing hikers, hunters, backpackers obviously violating regulations.

 

[hagman23]

Being fair to the OP, I don't see that he tried to shame anyone.

"So, my question, what would you do with the video? Report the person, leave it, figure out who to send it to? I am not trying to be a narc or a tattletale, but this is such an egregious act that this individual needs to learn from. What would you do?"

He's suggesting that the pilot needed to be educated about educating the pilot. He was asking for suggestions from the forum, not ranting and shaming. I commend him for being measured in his response and asking for input from others.

I wouldn't post it here looking for a consensus to shame another pilot for breaking the rules. Perhaps you could have just reached out to the pilot and 'offered' some education on UAV rules and the perception of and on the community.

I was not looking to “shame” anyone. There are a lot of people in this forum who have a lot more experience and knowledge about how to handle this than I have. But thanks for your concern.

 

[tlyons]

Agreed, I don't think drone noise interrupting peace and quiet is a thing; happy to drop that argument and never bring it up again as long as everybody agrees. I won't bring it up if [you] don't bring it up.

The majority of backcountry hikers make their own rules, too. We have facts and we have proof of that. The NP are being destroyed and it's not by drones. Let me know when you are ready to ban people from going into the backcountry. Would love for your stance on them to be as strong as they are on drones.

*Backpackers are just the example, it's not just them. Substitute your appropriate NP activity as necessary.

Why would everyone agree? The National Park Service specifically states it *is* a thing. In the introduction to Policy Memorandum 14-05, it's the first thing they mention:

"In some cases, their use has resulted in noise and nuisance complaints from park visitors, park visitor safety concerns, and one documented incident in which park wildlife were harassed. Small drones have crashed in geysers in Yellowstone National Park, attempted to land on the features of Mount Rushmore National Memorial, been lost over the edge of the Grand Canyon, and been stopped from flying in Prohibited Airspace over the Mall in Washington DC."

I remember being in a New Hampshire state park and an old Phantom passed over and hovered that sounded like a giant hair dryer. Not all drones are Minis and there are far, far more people escaping the city looking for peace and quiet offered in a National Park than there are people flying drones.

Let's face it: we had our chance and as a community we were pests.

Back country camping: you are camping somewhere different than I do. I see a very strong "leave no trace" vibe to the whole experience. It is common to see hikers carry a trash bag and pick up trash on the hike back out. In East, it is pretty rare to see much trash once >0.25 mile into the woods and you will be called out for dropping it. This is in places like the "live free or die" state.

Good luck!