Bans, Restrictions and Public Use

[bhartwell]

Well, in Virginia, localities are currently prohibited by state law to enact any legislation to regulate UAS.

§ 15.2-926.3. (Expires July 1, 2019) Local regulation of certain aircraft
§ 15.2-926.3. (Expires July 1, 2019) Local regulation of certain aircraft.
No locality may regulate the use of a privately owned, unmanned aircraft system as defined in § 19.2-60.1 within its boundaries.

They are, however, prohibited in Virginia State Parks.

Most National Forest Service properties are open for UAS use. The Forest Service has publicly stated that they have no jurisdiction over the airspace.

It’s great to hear that the Virginia State legislator has taken a stance on this. At least there is one governing entity in your case to work with when developing and adopting regulations. California as not been as progressive in this area, and here we have multiple, conflicting and often poorly defined regulations, or more often simple overarching bans.

 

[NRJ]

Why does your right to fly your noisy hobby flying camera over rule the right to quiet and relaxation of everyone else? When I'm in the back country enjoying nature the last thing I want is a UAS buzzing around overhead spoiling my peace and probably my view as well.

We need to find respectful places to fly like we have for decades.

Sometimes we feel like we are many but in reality our #'s or minuscule at best. In a dream world you'd see a time when our National Parts (and other parks) are open to any and all UAS activities you'll see a huge public outcry and reality would quickly set in. It's just not going to happen.

Define respectful places. Thinking only of yourself and being very narrow minded about it too, I see. A drone can fly approximately 30 minutes. Depending on your geographic location and where you live, many yards at a home take more than 30 minutes to mow with a loud gasoline lawn mower. Better regulate that! Congress (in the US) decided years ago not to require mufflers for loud motor cycles because there were just so few of them. But I live where there are approximately 3 people who have them and they are extremely loud even at a distance. Very noisy and yes, it disturbs my peace too. Better regulate their rights to a motorcycle, or better yet, find a respectful place for them to ride! Helicopters, planes, trains, and automobiles, better regulate them. Husband and wife neighbors fighting constantly, better regulate them. Babies crying, more regulation. Pretty soon, regulations will keep us indoors watching stupid reality shows about regulations. Please think about what you are proposing. Regulations shut down our rights. We all have rights and sometimes they will encroach on your rights and your rights will encroach over others rights.

 

[sar104]

Define respectful places. Thinking only of yourself and being very narrow minded about it too, I see. A drone can fly approximately 30 minutes. Depending on your geographic location and where you live, many yards at a home take more than 30 minutes to mow with a loud gasoline lawn mower. Better regulate that! Congress (in the US) decided years ago not to require mufflers for loud motor cycles because there were just so few of them. But I live where there are approximately 3 people who have them and they are extremely loud even at a distance. Very noisy and yes, it disturbs my peace too. Better regulate their rights to a motorcycle, or better yet, find a respectful place for them to ride! Helicopters, planes, trains, and automobiles, better regulate them. Husband and wife neighbors fighting constantly, better regulate them. Babies crying, more regulation. Pretty soon, regulations will keep us indoors watching stupid reality shows about regulations. Please think about what you are proposing. Regulations shut down our rights. We all have rights and sometimes they will encroach on your rights and your rights will encroach over others rights.

This discussion was about parks and wilderness, where lawn mowers are not permitted and vehicles, loud or otherwise, are only allowed on roads, so your examples are not really pertinent.

 

[NRJ]

Hi All,

I have been flying my P4 all around the US and various spots around the world. I love it, it’s one of the best inventions that has come along since the digital camera. There is no better way that I know, for an average person to be able to capture beautiful high definition aerial footage with near professional quality.

Sadly, it has become more and more difficult to use drones in public areas around the US. Most, if not all parks, preserves, open spaces, nature areas, etc. have restricted the use of drones. As have most local municipalities, local parks and regional recreation districts. The result is a mix mash of restrictions and local bans that make it near impossible to use these wonderful tools.

While I agree that appropriate guidelines should be prepared and enforced so as not to endanger others, impact wildlife or create a public nuisance. However, the current default stance of “just ban them” results ultimately in restricting access to public areas, specifically designed to be preserved and protected for the purpose of the public’s enjoyment. That is not acceptable and I think that we as a community of hobbyists have as much right to view and photograph these lands as any other group. I would also propose that if we don’t push for this as a group, the access will be taken from us without any discussion or perspective.

If your interested in defending our ability to use our drones. Please sign the attached partition and let our local governmental agencies know that the current default stance of banning drones is not acceptable or reasonable.

Sign the Petition

This is a great cause. I signed your petition bhartwell. But, I'm surprised that when I signed your petition today Saturday, there were only 15 signatures. How sad that people on this forum [Language Removed] and complain about the restrictions they have to fly under and there only have 15 signatures on your petition to lift these very restrictive regulations in most communities so that we too can take part in our hobbies. Typical complacency. We complain constantly but when it comes time to stand up and do something, nothing, Nada, Zilch. Hey, I understand, I'm lazy and don't want to go out of my way either. But, bhartwell the OP has gone out of his way to make it very easy for the rest of us to just sign his petition. He will send this to the appropriate people to at least attempt to let the powers to be know that; Hey, we are being locked out of our hobby in public places mostly out of ignorance. The least I can do is sign his petition. bhartwell will do the rest. Good for him and I support him as he is doing the work for the rest of us. I would hope that all of us on this forum would sign the petition that will hopefully give us more public land to fly over legally. If you disagree, that is your right, but remember the next time you can't fly in your neighborhood park and then come on this forum to complain about it.

 

[NRJ]

This discussion was about parks and wilderness, where lawn mowers are not permitted and vehicles, loud or otherwise, are only allowed on roads, so your examples are not really pertinent.

I disagree. Here is what the OP also said; "Sadly, it has become more and more difficult to use drones in public areas around the US. Most, if not all parks, preserves, open spaces, nature areas, etc. have restricted the use of drones. As have most local municipalities, local parks and regional recreation districts. The result is a mix mash of restrictions and local bans that make it near impossible to use these wonderful tools."

Notice he says; "As have most local municipalities, local parks and regional recreation districts. The result is a mix mash of restrictions and local bans that make it near impossible to use these wonderful tools." My examples are pertinent. He is talking about everywhere!

 

[sar104]

I disagree. Here is what the OP also said; "Sadly, it has become more and more difficult to use drones in public areas around the US. Most, if not all parks, preserves, open spaces, nature areas, etc. have restricted the use of drones. As have most local municipalities, local parks and regional recreation districts. The result is a mix mash of restrictions and local bans that make it near impossible to use these wonderful tools."

Notice he says; "As have most local municipalities, local parks and regional recreation districts. The result is a mix mash of restrictions and local bans that make it near impossible to use these wonderful tools." My examples are pertinent. He is talking about everywhere!

That's true, but you were responding to @BigAl07, who was talking about national parks and wilderness.

 

[sar104]

This is a great cause. I signed your petition bhartwell. But, I'm surprised that when I signed your petition today Saturday, there were only 15 signatures. How sad that people on this forum ***** and complain about the restrictions they have to fly under and there only have 15 signatures on your petition to lift these very restrictive regulations in most communities so that we too can take part in our hobbies. Typical complacency. We complain constantly but when it comes time to stand up and do something, nothing, Nada, Zilch. Hey, I understand, I'm lazy and don't want to go out of my way either. But, bhartwell the OP has gone out of his way to make it very easy for the rest of us to just sign his petition. He will send this to the appropriate people to at least attempt to let the powers to be know that; Hey, we are being locked out of our hobby in public places mostly out of ignorance. The least I can do is sign his petition. bhartwell will do the rest. Good for him and I support him as he is doing the work for the rest of us. I would hope that all of us on this forum would sign the petition that will hopefully give us more public land to fly over legally. If you disagree, that is your right, but remember the next time you can't fly in your neighborhood park and then come on this forum to complain about it.

Unfortunately it seems to me that the situation is more complex than the OP presents it as. In terms of geographical restrictions I would agree that some, maybe many, local jurisdictions have overreacted and are trying to ban UAVs everywhere, but there are many locations where I think it is appropriate to restrict their use.

 

[NRJ]

Unfortunately it seems to me that the situation is more complex than the OP presents it as. In terms of geographical restrictions I would agree that some, maybe many, local jurisdictions have overreacted and are trying to ban UAVs everywhere, but there are many locations where I think it is appropriate to restrict their use.

Of course, but the petition is also to let the powers to be know that we are being locked out of probably 80% of area's where we should be able to fly. If we say nothing because there are some area's that do need regulation or banning, we will lose it all. This petition is to start the ball rolling to 'Alert' the nation that this is wrong and uncalled for and we need to regulate the local regulators who are over regulating our hobby. I think your argument should not keep you from signing this petition. We need to regulate the banishment's in area's where there is no reason to banish drone flying.

 

[sar104]

Of course, but the petition is also to let the powers to be know that we are being locked out of probably 80% of area's where we should be able to fly. If we say nothing because there are some area's that do need regulation or banning, we will lose it all. This petition is to start the ball rolling to 'Alert' the nation that this is wrong and uncalled for and we need to regulate the local regulators who are over regulating our hobby. I think your argument should not keep you from signing this petition. We need to regulate the banishment's in area's where there is no reason to banish drone flying.

Fair point, but in that context I think the wording of the petition is too broad. It also conspicuously ignores the huge areas of non-wilderness National Forest, BLM land etc., where flying is explicitly permitted. I'd like to see a more detailed argument for where and why, especially which kinds of local or state land make sense for flying - then I might want to sign it.

 

[NRJ]

Fair point, but in that context I think the wording of the petition is too broad. It also conspicuously ignores the huge areas of non-wilderness National Forest, BLM land etc., where flying is explicitly permitted. I'd like to see a more detailed argument for where and why, especially which kinds of local or state land make sense for flying - then I might want to sign it.

If you present a petition that is as detailed as a law or regulation would be, it will never be acknowledged as nobody will read it because it is too long and detailed. They won't agree to sign it because they didn't read it to find out it's purpose. The way it is, the common layman can quickly read it and agree or disagree. If he agree's even in theory, it gets signatures and can proceed to the next level which is to move it forward. If detailed like you want, it stops right there. The signing layman mostly cares about flying, not the final wording. Lets just get the ball rolling and that is done by signing (if you agree) the petition.

 

[bhartwell]

This is a great cause. I signed your petition bhartwell. But, I'm surprised that when I signed your petition today Saturday, there were only 15 signatures. How sad that people on this forum ***** and complain about the restrictions they have to fly under and there only have 15 signatures on your petition to lift these very restrictive regulations in most communities so that we too can take part in our hobbies. Typical complacency. We complain constantly but when it comes time to stand up and do something, nothing, Nada, Zilch. Hey, I understand, I'm lazy and don't want to go out of my way either. But, bhartwell the OP has gone out of his way to make it very easy for the rest of us to just sign his petition. He will send this to the appropriate people to at least attempt to let the powers to be know that; Hey, we are being locked out of our hobby in public places mostly out of ignorance. The least I can do is sign his petition. bhartwell will do the rest. Good for him and I support him as he is doing the work for the rest of us. I would hope that all of us on this forum would sign the petition that will hopefully give us more public land to fly over legally. If you disagree, that is your right, but remember the next time you can't fly in your neighborhood park and then come on this forum to complain about it.

Thank you NRJ, and I appreciate everybody’s comments, be they encouraging or negative. That’s why we live in a democracy, so we can have a discussion on important issues and take into account all perspectives.

If anyone has thoughts on how to improve the language of the petition, just let me know, I am glad for any help I can get. I am no lawyer, I’m just a guy who happens to really enjoy these tools and wants to see the industry grow and mature.

The petition is intended to be a starting point. I would use it to prepare more detailed appeals to Park and Land Agencies that have banned drones, asking them to work with us to reconsider an outright ban in favor of reasonable guidelines or rules. It’s just a start, after a few days, we now have about 20 signatures. Not enough by far, but it’s a start.

Nothing changes unless we want the change to happen. Laws get passed that don’t make sense, because people don’t get involved, or assume if they just keep their heads down and don’t bother anybody, it will be just fine or it won’t impact them. That’s just not the case, if we want reasonable guidelines instead of broad sweeping bans, and the continued ability to use these tools and the wonderful capabilities they have, we need to be part of the process.

 

[N017RW]

Too bad you can't proxy all the other, similar, petitions promulgated here.
Collectively you'd almost have something.

 

[bhartwell]

Fair point, but in that context I think the wording of the petition is too broad. It also conspicuously ignores the huge areas of non-wilderness National Forest, BLM land etc., where flying is explicitly permitted. I'd like to see a more detailed argument for where and why, especially which kinds of local or state land make sense for flying - then I might want to sign it.

Appreciate your comments Sar104, I would be interested in your thoughts on how to reword or edit the text. I don’t focus on areas in which drones are permitted as the petition would not be directed at those agencies. The wording is intentionally broad as the purpose is to open a discussion with an agency or agencies that have banned drones, letting them know that there is a public interest in discussing the topic and looking at alternatives to outright bans.

 

[BigAl07]

...... But, I'm surprised that when I signed your petition today Saturday, there were only 15 signatures.

That in and of itself should be a HUGE clue that you're a bit delusional about the great # of people who are against stronger regulations.

....This petition is to start the ball rolling to 'Alert' the nation that this is wrong and uncalled for and we need to regulate the local regulators who are over regulating our hobby. ...

Here on this forum and in our "circle of friends" it seems like the #'s are on your side. Reality doesn't always align with our own short field of view. Keep in mind that a GREAT portion of our nation is not only against us flying our toys so freely but many of them are down right afraid of them. I'm pretty sure the majority of this nation will be strongly against "Free Flying".

 

[bhartwell]

That in and of itself should be a HUGE clue that you're a bit delusional about the great # of people who are against stronger regulations.



Here on this forum and in our "circle of friends" it seems like the #'s are on your side. Reality doesn't always align with our own short field of view. Keep in mind that a GREAT portion of our nation is not only against us flying our toys so freely but many of them are down right afraid of them. I'm pretty sure the majority of this nation will be strongly against "Free Flying".

Seems pretty short sighted. A few years back, people couldn’t understand why you would want to carry a phone around with you. Film seemed good enough, this digital stuff was never going to last. Electric cars? What a silly gimmick, gas cars are better, faster. Social media, what’s that? If you asked the majority of the nation about many of these things they would be strongly against many of the advances we have seen. That’s why discussion, communication and discourse is critical. To be blunt, drones are going to happen. They are going to start showing up all over the place. As toys, as high end digital recorders, as delivery tools, etc. We can talk about why getting involved won’t matter, let’s wait until somebody else figures it out, but this seems to be a very shorter sighted way to look at this issue.

 

[BigAl07]

@bhartwell I don't think you're comparing apples to apples here. There's a HUGE difference between flying our UAS and the items/services you mentioned. Just because we LOVE and are passionate about our hobby doesn't mean the rest of the nation (or world) is going to also fall in love the way we have.

I'm also not saying, "let’s wait until somebody else figures it out" at all. I'm against "Free Range" UAS operations anywhere and everywhere. I want places of quiet and solitude without UAS buzzing around.

So no, I'm not being short sighted in the least.

 

[eaglegoaltender]

You can also sign my petition as I will be advocating for the same thing, clear guidelines that respect drone operators rights to use these wonderful tools, especially in/over public lands, reserves and parks with the potential privacy, nuisance, impact and fair use issues that need to be addressed.

Be careful what you wish for - the "clear guidelines" -- as was asked for and in a lot of cases "petitioned for" up here in Canada led to even tighter restrictions.

Pathetically so, and were for the most part drawn up by ignorance of the product and it's intent along with so called "data" collected from "drone sighting" sites
that had multiple ridiculous and exaggerated events of so called dangerous flying and for the most part - without a shred of evidence to support same!

Some very detailed and educated letters and petitions from very qualified business orientated quad pilots and experienced users were completely ignored by those
who simply shudder at the word "drone". That word is the "killer" for this hobby!

Even Transport Canada (FAA equivalent up here) has a "report a drone sighting" section on it's website and anything negative that is reported is taken as "truth"!

Note: I am for regulating the safe operation of a UAS 100% -- however and sadly after complaints by some end users up here that were pushing for "clearer guidelines"
and more freedoms regarding where and when to fly - we got exactly what we asked for - regulations that went to the extreme.

 

[bhartwell]

Be careful what you wish for - the "clear guidelines" -- as was asked for and in a lot of cases "petitioned for" up here in Canada led to even tighter restrictions.

Pathetically so, and were for the most part drawn up by ignorance of the product and it's intent along with so called "data" collected from "drone sighting" sites
that had multiple ridiculous and exaggerated events of so called dangerous flying and for the most part - without a shred of evidence to support same!

Some very detailed and educated letters and petitions from very qualified business orientated quad pilots and experienced users were completely ignored by those
who simply shudder at the word "drone". That word is the "killer" for this hobby!

Even Transport Canada (FAA equivalent up here) has a "report a drone sighting" section on it's website and anything negative that is reported is taken as "truth"!

Note: I am for regulating the safe operation of a UAS 100% -- however and sadly after complaints by some end users up here that were pushing for "clearer guidelines"
and more freedoms regarding where and when to fly - we got exactly what we asked for - regulations that went to the extreme.

Yes, this is my fear as well, which is why I am hoping that the perspective of the enthusiasts of drones and of aerial photography in general be part of the discussion and to not see punitive restrictions applied simply out of ignorance, fear or unwarranted concerns raised by members of the general public that seem to harbor them.

I really don’t understand the hostility towards drones. They don’t make much more of a nuisance of themselves then a typical bird, yet people seem to have visceral reactions to them. Maybe it’s the name, “drone” has typically been used to refer to remotely controlled bombs or other weapons. Or just the idea of a camera in the sky has people putting on tinfoil hats, as irrational as it seems.

A guy with a long range, telescoping lens camera, taking pictures of a landscape, or people surfing, hiking, etc., seldom gets a glance. A guy doing the same with a drone, and people speculate on motive and intent.

Would it make sense to take the focus away from the word “drone”? Maybe use the term UAS or aerial photography, etc. I wonder if some the issue relates to the negative cognition associated with Drones, as opposed to cameras that can fly.

 

[eaglegoaltender]

Would it make sense to take the focus away from the word “drone”? Maybe use the term UAS or aerial photography, etc. I wonder if some the issue relates to the negative cognition associated with Drones, as opposed to cameras that can fly.

Absolutely the name "Drone" brings out nothing but media induced fear in the general public.

UAS or even just Quad Copter are actually the correct terms by definition anyway.

Our Transport Canada Minister is always using the term 'Drone" and I think he does that intentionally for dramatic & negative effect when describing these units.

Considering he was a Canadian Astronaut on the International Space Station - one would think he should know better and have a much better grip on these things.

Hence the reason I think he intentionally calls them "drones" - a word now associated with "fear, spying, danger, concerns and the list goes on and on"!

I am hoping that the perspective of the enthusiasts of drones and of aerial photography in general be part of the discussion

We had some very professional and licensed UAS and Private Plane Pilots who sent letters with very detailed information regarding the safeguards built into these units and many of whom
signed petitions and spoke at various "town hall discussions" on same.

People who really knew what they were talking about and who put the Transport Canada Reps present at meetings in positions of not being able to answer questions or comment on same subject - not anywhere near the competence and knowledge of the pilots of safe operation of a UAS.

All seemed to fall on deaf ears however as we ended up with such ridiculously tight restrictions - all put together by the ignorant, the incompetent those who refused to listen.

A guy with a long range, telescoping lens camera, taking pictures of a landscape, or people surfing, hiking, etc., seldom gets a glance. A guy doing the same with a drone, and people speculate on motive and intent.

Ha - exactly the point I have made many times over when discussing the Phantoms and it's proper intent - that being Ariel photography.

 

[John Tarvin]

This is false.

Certainly, some localities and municipalities have enacted some restrictions, but there is no evidence that it is "most" and certainly not "all".

I support the ban in our national parks and in wildlife preserves. I fly a LOT on BLM public lands and in national forests. Some of our state parks allow drones (it's up to the district superintendents). Our county parks do not allow you to take off, land, or operate in them.., but you are free to fly over them.

Interestingly, our small city of 44,000 just passed an ordinance change allowing us to fly in our 8 city parks. It became effective 10/27/2017. Haven't done it yet. Afraid I'll tick somebody off. I want to spread good will.