No way to prevent stupid. Unfortunately, these media events will hurt our freedoms.
http://news.yahoo.com/banned-drone-may- ... 59323.html
http://news.yahoo.com/banned-drone-may- ... 59323.html
Damage to our hobby
- Thread starter Gr8Chef
- Start date
What a useless story. Nothing more than some fluff that fell off of the original story. The title, 'Banned Drone May Have Damaged Yellowstone Spring" is completely speculation at this point.
I totally oppose the blanket ban of UAVs at National Parks. These are NOT wildlife preserves. They are PARKS, there for the enjoyment of ALL people, with many thousands of square miles of land often devoid of anyone. I get not allowing UAVs to operate over large crowds of people, but there were no people in the Grand Prismatic spring. None alive at least... 
I have to chuckle when I read the article commenting on "OMG what kind of damage is the drone going to do to the spring?" Probably about as much "damage" as would happen should one hit George Washington's nose on Mt. Rushmore! Visitors on foot do a lot more damage to the park than will ever be done by the occasional UAV.
I don't particularly care for screaming brats, but they have a right to be in the park. The parks are there for ALL of our enjoyment.
I have to chuckle when I read the article commenting on "OMG what kind of damage is the drone going to do to the spring?" Probably about as much "damage" as would happen should one hit George Washington's nose on Mt. Rushmore! Visitors on foot do a lot more damage to the park than will ever be done by the occasional UAV. I don't particularly care for screaming brats, but they have a right to be in the park. The parks are there for ALL of our enjoyment.
Dirty Bird said:SpikeFinch said:
Only if I get to toss them in the spring!
Would we have to report that? or would they put a ban on kid tossing in National Parks, and would they try and get it out or just leave it there.. :twisted:
I am sure our current administration will use it as a spring board. Will be a huge toxic Superfund to rectify all the damage that has been done. :roll:
Dirty Bird said:I totally oppose the blanket ban of UAVs at National Parks. These are NOT wildlife preserves. They are PARKS, there for the enjoyment of ALL people, with many thousands of square miles of land often devoid of anyone. I get not allowing UAVs to operate over large crowds of people, but there were no people in the Grand Prismatic spring. None alive at least...
I don't particularly care for screaming brats, but they have a right to be in the park. The parks are there for ALL of our enjoyment.
+1
Dirty Bird said:I totally oppose the blanket ban of UAVs at National Parks. These are NOT wildlife preserves. They are PARKS, there for the enjoyment of ALL people, with many thousands of square miles of land often devoid of anyone. I get not allowing UAVs to operate over large crowds of people, but there were no people in the Grand Prismatic spring. None alive at least...
I don't particularly care for screaming brats, but they have a right to be in the park. The parks are there for ALL of our enjoyment.
Screaming brats... trash spewing campers not tending to campfires properly and burning thousands of acres per year... long lines of automobiles dripping oil and transmission fluid on roadways with runoff leading to park rivers... helicopter tours flying over head... passenger airlines flying farther over head...
But the gentle whirring coming from my Phantom is going to RUIN IT ALL FOR EVERYONE!!! :roll:
I'm still of the opinion that the ban on drones in our national parks is a disgrace to the park service and somewhat of a violation of our First Amendment rights.
Consider that photography is a form of expression, protected by the First Amendment. The National Park Service permits other sorts of photography within its boundaries. I understand that they even have processes which allow one to apply for and receive permission to conduct commercial photography sessions.
And yet they treat aerial photography as a totally different subject, prohibited completely, without providing even a shred of consideration to using existing permit processes to allow for limited aerial photo sessions.
Sounds like a really bad decision to me. I wish I had the financial resources to hire a team of attorneys to fight the NPS on this, as I believe they are 100% wrong.
Consider that photography is a form of expression, protected by the First Amendment. The National Park Service permits other sorts of photography within its boundaries. I understand that they even have processes which allow one to apply for and receive permission to conduct commercial photography sessions.
And yet they treat aerial photography as a totally different subject, prohibited completely, without providing even a shred of consideration to using existing permit processes to allow for limited aerial photo sessions.
Sounds like a really bad decision to me. I wish I had the financial resources to hire a team of attorneys to fight the NPS on this, as I believe they are 100% wrong.
CRankin said:
it isn't the photography aspect they object to, it is the RC drone . I would guess they don't have RC flight with anything in the parks either??
locoworks said:
Yes, but in the case of aerial photography one is inextricably tied to the other. And if they permit one type of photography while effectively banning another without good reason, I'd suggest that their actions are inappropriate. It would be really nice if someone with the financial resources would dedicate himself/herself to making the lives of people working for the NPS a living hell until they take a more reasonable approach to things.
Similar threads
