Can you fly into a national park from outside park boundaries?
- Thread starter tristan.c
- Start date
That is the only "legal" way to do it. However, if you are within 5 miles of an airport you will be restricted by the software. Many official parking areas are also near airports who fly tourists over the parks. I will note that in April/May this year we visited almost every state and national park in Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and Colorado and I never saw a single ranger ever (other than taking money at the gates). I did see many people flying drones and no one was complaining about it. I think the NPS has had a severe cut to their funding and have reduced staffing to nearly zero. I did run into several volunteer rangers (BLM types) but they were focused on controlling numbers of people into remote areas and were staying in the parking areas. So, at this point it is a matter of enforcement and compliance. Obviously, law abiding citizens will obey the rules no matter what, others are more flexible and will obey if they think they will get caught, and some will disobey no matter what and enjoy running the risk. What I saw was a majority of the latter, particularly motorcycles gang types flying pretty much anywhere they wanted obviously flaunting any rules, but they probably would never get challenged anyway. It would require a fairly large response force to deal with a group of bikers and I just don't see the manpower available to deal with something relatively trivial like flying a Mavic. Maybe in other parks there is more manpower. But what I saw everywhere I went was a dearth of it. This is true even in the private parks run by the native Americans.
Sadly, what I was seeing, and this is far worse than flying drones (which I personally disagree with the ban), were people destroying property, hiking in forbidden areas, destroying vegetation, etc. So, the US government is having a huge problem dealing with managing the parks at all. Maybe they are counting on the citizens to control it themselves?
With the UAS rules in a state of flux it is hard to determine what the definitions are and how they apply to the other federal and state agencies. The restriction put in place by the NPS restricts take-offs and landings for all aircraft inside park boundaries. How you define an aircraft is where the issues will lie. I had purchased a Zerotech Dobby which at 190 grams is below the legal definition of a UAS as defined by the FAA but has (sort of) 4K capabilities. I didn't even bother to bring my Phantom 4 to the US but regret that decision as I could have flown it pretty much everywhere without any problems. I also brought a Kite Aerial Photography rig which is perfectly legal anywhere (so far). I have that for when the winds are too excessive for flying a UAS like the Phantom 4. But, no one was there to ever check so I was disappointed to not have to defend any challenges (for my Dobby or for the kite). One of our group bought a DJI Mavic Pro and that was flown everywhere we went without any issues ever. They live outside the US so later enforcement is a non-starter say based on a published photo or video.
I fail to understand the logic being applied to UAS ban in parks. Take the Grand Canyon National Park as an example. There are a plethora of aircraft overflying the canyon roughly 1 every minute at relatively low altitudes. I saw quite a few animals such as elk and they are immune to the presence of humans or aircraft. You can literally go up and pet them if you wanted to. The noise of thousands of humans running amok and all these large aircraft and helicopters is far more of a noise hazard than a UAS is and clearly the animals have gotten used to it. But, the Grand Canyon is huge and the areas where people are allowed are really very small so maybe they are sacrificing a small area to save the larger area? We all know that after 100 meters you can't see or hear a Phantom or Mavic at all so I don't see the logic here. Impact from altitude might be more of a concern or like happened in Yellowstone some guy crashed his drone in a geyser. But, a different guy fell in drowned and was dissolved overnight so again the logic is weak.
I had the pleasure or working one summer, before being drafted into the Army, at Mammoth Hot Springs in Yellowstone. Every day we all went out and fished out litter from the hot springs and pools tossed in by the tourists. So, this is an ongoing problem of pollution and I just don't see the need to specifically restrict one group of tourists who generally are safe. Obviously, the same restricted tourists by their actions are telling the US government what they think of the ban. Personally, I obeyed it but I did get some great shots using my kite. The Dobby is more or less useless as it has a range of 100 meters a 9 minute flight time (actually a lot less after calibrating the compass) and cannot fly in any significant wind at all. But, it is great as a selfie drone for short distance shots and does fit in your pocket. I did use it to fly in slot canyons way out in the off road regions not in parks.
Maybe things will change as this hobby becomes mainstream.
Sadly, what I was seeing, and this is far worse than flying drones (which I personally disagree with the ban), were people destroying property, hiking in forbidden areas, destroying vegetation, etc. So, the US government is having a huge problem dealing with managing the parks at all. Maybe they are counting on the citizens to control it themselves?
With the UAS rules in a state of flux it is hard to determine what the definitions are and how they apply to the other federal and state agencies. The restriction put in place by the NPS restricts take-offs and landings for all aircraft inside park boundaries. How you define an aircraft is where the issues will lie. I had purchased a Zerotech Dobby which at 190 grams is below the legal definition of a UAS as defined by the FAA but has (sort of) 4K capabilities. I didn't even bother to bring my Phantom 4 to the US but regret that decision as I could have flown it pretty much everywhere without any problems. I also brought a Kite Aerial Photography rig which is perfectly legal anywhere (so far). I have that for when the winds are too excessive for flying a UAS like the Phantom 4. But, no one was there to ever check so I was disappointed to not have to defend any challenges (for my Dobby or for the kite). One of our group bought a DJI Mavic Pro and that was flown everywhere we went without any issues ever. They live outside the US so later enforcement is a non-starter say based on a published photo or video.
I fail to understand the logic being applied to UAS ban in parks. Take the Grand Canyon National Park as an example. There are a plethora of aircraft overflying the canyon roughly 1 every minute at relatively low altitudes. I saw quite a few animals such as elk and they are immune to the presence of humans or aircraft. You can literally go up and pet them if you wanted to. The noise of thousands of humans running amok and all these large aircraft and helicopters is far more of a noise hazard than a UAS is and clearly the animals have gotten used to it. But, the Grand Canyon is huge and the areas where people are allowed are really very small so maybe they are sacrificing a small area to save the larger area? We all know that after 100 meters you can't see or hear a Phantom or Mavic at all so I don't see the logic here. Impact from altitude might be more of a concern or like happened in Yellowstone some guy crashed his drone in a geyser. But, a different guy fell in drowned and was dissolved overnight so again the logic is weak.
I had the pleasure or working one summer, before being drafted into the Army, at Mammoth Hot Springs in Yellowstone. Every day we all went out and fished out litter from the hot springs and pools tossed in by the tourists. So, this is an ongoing problem of pollution and I just don't see the need to specifically restrict one group of tourists who generally are safe. Obviously, the same restricted tourists by their actions are telling the US government what they think of the ban. Personally, I obeyed it but I did get some great shots using my kite. The Dobby is more or less useless as it has a range of 100 meters a 9 minute flight time (actually a lot less after calibrating the compass) and cannot fly in any significant wind at all. But, it is great as a selfie drone for short distance shots and does fit in your pocket. I did use it to fly in slot canyons way out in the off road regions not in parks.
Maybe things will change as this hobby becomes mainstream.
alokbhargava
Premium Pilot
The specific regulation cited specifies: "delivering or retrieving a person or object by parachute, helicopter or other airborne means, except in emergencies involving public safety or serious property loss, or pursuant to the terms and conditions of a permit,". You must figure out what that is actually saying. In effect it can mean anything they want.
An excellent analysis of the ban and it's illogical arguments are presented here: Park Service's Sweeping Ban Of Model Aircraft And Drones Creates Confusion
Another interesting article is here: Feds Confiscated a Hobbyist's Drone Footage to Keep It Off the Internet
What is more interesting is there is a process to get a special use permit which I did attempt to do. I was told in no uncertain terms it would never happen and that only 2 permits have been issued since the ban has been enforced and both of these were for NPS personnel to film advertising material.
I get that they want to limit the use and have some kind of assurance of safe and legal operation which doesn't endanger flora or fauna. Likely this will eventually force only hexacopters which have a redundancy built in. I see this in several countries here in Europe as they want some assurance that crashes will be prevented in cases of a motor failure. Maybe that over-simplifies the problem but these same countries also recognize there is a lower limit to weight and potential damages from a crash. A limit of 250 grams seems to be the threshold for legal permissions and this is also what the FAA is saying. But, the NPS is stating everything is banned. From an administrative standpoint it is easier to enforce a blanket ban. Also, this is not a new requirement only the application of an older regulation to a new problem. Should they write an entirely new regulation which specifically addresses UAS then it has to go through a long process of public review and comment. That is not happening.
I believe a process could be created so that licensed pilots flying licensed UAS could file and receive a special use permit to operate a UAS over NPS land. But, so far there is no impetus to do this. We are voters though and UAS is an ever increasing hobby and profession. Eventually, they will bend to the will of the people but IMHO it will not happen for quite a while. It would be a nice PR stunt though to develop a Special Use permit process which of course will require a fee so they could actually profit from it. It would likely require a flight plan, with detailed itinerary, crew requirements, insurance, etc. and mandate direct supervision by a ranger. This is a reasonable approach and it could self fund the program of supervision and management. I would imagine a permit to run in the range of $250-$500 per use. Higher than that and non-compliance remains an issue.
But, as for now they seem like a typical bureaucratic response to a new situation and in this current political climate it is not high on the list of priorities. As I mentioned they have enormous problems with staffing and supervision of the parks in general and dealing with a relatively trivial problem of UAS is not going to be high on the list.
alokbhargava
Premium Pilot
If I'm right, ban started when model aircrafts with props were introduced and there was a general concern that such aircrafts have high temperature parts like engines, high octane gasoline or motors and batteries which if come in contact with ground , may ignite fire destroying the entire national park. There were other reasons too.
Last edited:
Most recently the ban took effect when the idiot flew one on the White House grounds. Shortly thereafter in 2015 NPS was enforcing the ban. At least that's what one Park Ranger told me while on the boat to Fort Jefferson in the Dry Tortugas 2 years ago
Just how many of us have 'friends' that have flown within NPS boundaries and no picnic baskets were inspected by the Yogi police?
USCG stationed in Key West a few years ago. Dry Tortugas would be a BEAUTIFUL place to get your drone off.
From what I have observed there is zero enforcement if you are smart enough to stay away from people and not stupid enough to put it on the internet. Also, if you stay near boundaries and definitely away from airports or low flying corridors for tourist flights then it will be difficult to litigate it. I mentioned it before but it is very obvious they have serious staffing issues and do not have enough Rangers to even enforce people staying on pathways or from damaging public property. It is a matter or resources and the meager personnel they can afford cannot deal with ordinary issues much less UAS flights. They are resorting to volunteer personnel who may or may not have sufficient training to deal with UAS (probably not). I saw this with BLM enforcement and was forced to argue with a volunteer who said our group (because we registered at the trailhead) was too large to go. So, we drove off had lunch and came back when she was gone and stayed in smaller groups within the limit of the rules of 4 or less per group. She could have let us split into smaller groups and stagger the departures but she couldn't see that argument being a tree hugging liberal fruit and nuts type. This is the other problem I run into with these places. The mentality and overall intelligence of these personnel make it difficult to deal with on a rational basis.
Yes ! you can not land or take off in a NP like yellowstone but you may fly into it's airspace and fly out . planes and helicopters do it all the time . so it is legal anyone you says otherwise should please post a link to the law that it's not allowed . just my 2cent
Correct, this has always been the case. You can fly in and out, but you cannot take off or land in a NP. The problem is at most national parks that doesn't help much because the good POIs are more than 3mi from a park border, and LOS proximity is generally tough. One exception is Lake Powell, where you can launch from some of the the southern shorelines which is Navajo Indian land, then fly over the national park lake and up canyons, very carefully.
Similar threads
