Finally had a chat with "authority."

I don’t think I have to prove drones are loud, anybody who has flown one can verify that fact. The main complaint is the noise. Beyond that there are concerns over keeping the beauty of the park. 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 and been lost over the edge of the Grand Canyon. The National Park Service embraces many activities in national parks because they enhance visitor experiences with the iconic natural, historic and cultural landscapes in our care. Also, you can’t blare your radio at a park or drive your car anywhere you want through it. All of those rules are specifically designed to maintain the peaceful tranquility of national parks.
Well, I'm sure there are plenty of times when some "operator" buzzed the beaches, buzzed wildlife... general nuisance. That's why these rules happened in the first place, because there are always people who can't behave themselves with their toys. And for that, we all have to suffer.
 
Yep, it's always a hitch when the authorities catch you breaking the law and aren't all nice about it. You fly, it's your responsibility to know where you can legally fly. Instead of not being nice, he should have just cited you.
No. In a supposedly civil society, he should be civil. This covers more than drones. It's leaning too much toward guilty until proven innocent. This is way bigger than the topic of drones, but I expect this is not the forum in which to start down that path.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bad karma
I've flown - safe and sane - in Wisconsin state parks and forests and riverways for 5 years now. I've come across rangers who never had any problems and were even interested and asked me to demonstrate for them. Yesterday, at Devil's Lake State Park, I thought I'd get some aerial shots of a huge Native American effigy mound in the shape of a man-bird. Nobody was around the mound and I kept my entire flight immediately above it. I had pretty much got all my shots and was in the high 20% on the battery so I was already bringing it in when a ranger showed up and told me to bring it in. I told him I was doing just that, and he told me again to bring it in. I asked him if I hadn't just said that.

He proceeded to inform me that quadcopters and the like aren't allowed in any state parks in WI. Couldn't have told you that based on previous rangers' reactions... but I was landing anyway.

Just bugged me that I was being totally cooperative and civil, and yet he felt the need to push the order he gave. Part of the problem is my difficulty with authority figures young enough to be my kids.

Oh well. I put it away and he went off and hassled someone else for using too much charcoal on the grills or something.

:)

I am not really sympathetic to you .... I am in Aussie and even I know that your State Parks are verbotten to multi- rotor flights. However long ago when I got my P3P - some USA resident asked about flying in Sydney.

Now at that time things were not so hyper and a few guys flew in the Botanical Gardens - from which at a lowly 60feet - cameras could get a good sweep of the bay, Opera house, "The Coat hanger" ( Sydney Bridge) and Circular quay ...ALL high risk terrorist attack locations - and so a no flying area. Also we have two sea planes taking off and landing on the water a couple of miles down the bay AND at least 2 heliports.

So I say to the guy... go to the back of the gardens out of the way.. plenty of space coz the tourists are all staring at the Opera House etc,. DONT do 400 feet and draw attention..... and what did he do?? Less the 100 yards from the Opera House... he took off. 24 hours later he was posting on here in the same tone as you! When his "authority" turned out to be 7 security guards...armed and expecting a terrorist attack!
Now its strictly forbidden to fly anything in the Gardens or near all the above I mentioned.

So my opinion is --if you don't want to obey your own regulations or license condition.... safe your bleeting for your local priest - who will be too polite to indicate you were wrong and let everybody know so by posting.
 
This is an interesting case. I think there are two separate issues here. I'm not going to get into the age of the local law enforcement officer. This is not so cut and dry.

It is true that we must "follow the rules" and that's even a question on the 107 exam. Anti-authoritarianism is a trait that the FAA does not like, like impulsiveness and machoism.

If you are flying in a place where a local authority has prohibited flying, I would expect to draw both unwanted attention from law enforcement and a fine. It's not something I would do just because I find it very unpleasant in general when being on the wrong side of local law enforcement.

It is a separate issue whether this Wisconsin prohibition on flying in state parks is a valid law. Every law has to have a rational basis and what is the rational basis for the Wisconsin ban? What public purpose is that blanket ban serving? The law is invalid if there is no rational basis.

Separately is the question of whether Wisconsin even has the right to ban an otherwise authorized aircraft from state park airspace. It seems to me that the only the FAA has jurisdiction over Wisconsin state park airspace. I don't think that Wisconsin could ban other FAA regulated aircraft like ultra-lights or Cessnas or air balloons over WI state park airspace so it would not make sense that they could ban an FAA regulated UAS being flown properly either under the recreational exception or Part 107.

The precedent concerns me, because I live in the US west where a blanket restriction on flying in state parks would take away millions of acres of public land (and much of it very remote and film-worthy) airspace from drone operators. I think that while we need to obviously follow the local laws that exist, we should be careful as drone operators about ceding airspace to local jurisdictions.

Unfortunately, the president is already set. Across most of the California coast, local jurisdictions have banned drones. In NorCal where I live, all parks and open spaces have banned drones. The nature reserves in the area have banned drones (i.e Point Reyes, all East Bay preserves). All of our open space areas have banned drones. While CA state parks are as of now inconsistent, the local park director is given full discretion.

I brought this topic up in another thread when I found I was unable to fly in or around The Valley of Fire, NV or Red Rock Canyon (near Las Vegas). Both parks have complete bans, not restrictions, bans.

The disappointing bit is that most of the drone community doesn’t seem to care or be willing to act. While I support appropriate use rules, and establishing guidelines such that drones don’t pose a danger to or nuisance to the public. These arbitrary general bans are unfair and limit our fair use of public lands. That being said, if nobody is willing to raise a voice about it, then don’t complain when you can’t fly or if you get a hefty fine just for taking some video of a beautiful bit of open space.


https://www.change.org/p/local-comm...ordinances-and-bans-against-the-use-of-drones
 
I am not really sympathetic to you .... I am in Aussie and even I know that your State Parks are verbotten to multi- rotor flights. However long ago when I got my P3P - some USA resident asked about flying in Sydney.

Now at that time things were not so hyper and a few guys flew in the Botanical Gardens - from which at a lowly 60feet - cameras could get a good sweep of the bay, Opera house, "The Coat hanger" ( Sydney Bridge) and Circular quay ...ALL high risk terrorist attack locations - and so a no flying area. Also we have two sea planes taking off and landing on the water a couple of miles down the bay AND at least 2 heliports.

So I say to the guy... go to the back of the gardens out of the way.. plenty of space coz the tourists are all staring at the Opera House etc,. DONT do 400 feet and draw attention..... and what did he do?? Less the 100 yards from the Opera House... he took off. 24 hours later he was posting on here in the same tone as you! When his "authority" turned out to be 7 security guards...armed and expecting a terrorist attack!
Now its strictly forbidden to fly anything in the Gardens or near all the above I mentioned.

So my opinion is --if you don't want to obey your own regulations or license condition.... safe your bleeting for your local priest - who will be too polite to indicate you were wrong and let everybody know so by posting.
Here it is again. I didn't say the law was wrong, I complied as soon as I was told. My main complaint was the attitude... much like yours. I expect the attitude of a public servant, whose wages I pay, to be cordial and polite, until I GIVE him a reason not to be. In my mind, speaking to him courteously and doing what he said seems to be more than enough for him to say thank you and be on his way. My wife, who was with me at the time, observed it and speculated that his attitude was an attempt to provoke me into getting upset so he'd have a reason to escalate things. Just an opinion, but it seems feasible.

And, being a non-practicing Lutheran, I don't talk to the local priest much. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: bad karma
Gosh, I’m confused. I thought I did a search of rules before a recent vacation in Door County Wisconsin. I took a sectional chart for airport locations, but I don’t remember State Parks being NFZ. If I go back, where is that law/regulation/guideline written.
After all this, I did a general search about drones in state parks and found info. There are a few state parks (Bong recreation area* south of Milwaukee) that have some limited access areas, but for the most part, it's a no-no. I don't know if it's a law, a rule, a regulation, or if there's a difference between any of them. I googled "drones in WI state parks."

*(the name of that place always made me laugh a little)
 
  • Like
Reactions: bad karma
Funny, I'm planning on going to a COUNTY park in WI today to get shots of another effigy mound. I googled "drones in WI county parks" and there's nothing solid in place, but they're working on it. Meanwhile, on that very page, in the lower right corner, is an advertisement for tours of the North Point Lighthouse in Milwaukee, and it's all drone footage showing the lighthouse itself. Is this irony?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bad karma
Hey, new guy here. I’ve researched the county park regs, and from what I can tell it varies by county. Dane county doesn’t allow take offs or landing. Green and Rock counties have no regulations that I can find.
 
Here it is again. I didn't say the law was wrong, I complied as soon as I was told. My main complaint was the attitude... much like yours. I expect the attitude of a public servant, whose wages I pay, to be cordial and polite, until I GIVE him a reason not to be. In my mind, speaking to him courteously and doing what he said seems to be more than enough for him to say thank you and be on his way. My wife, who was with me at the time, observed it and speculated that his attitude was an attempt to provoke me into getting upset so he'd have a reason to escalate things. Just an opinion, but it seems feasible.

And, being a non-practicing Lutheran, I don't talk to the local priest much. :)

No wonder you do things wrong! READ my reply - WHERE did I say USA law was wrong?? Followed by a typical juvenile " I complied as soon as I was told" - you KNEW you should not be flying there - no matter you were given lee way by a more docile Ranger. Dress it up any way you want - you operated knowing that US State Parks have a blanket no flying ban with regard drones, quads, planes Multi rotor or other flying devices using a RC controller. You seem to think you can be excused by the "generosity" of one particular ranger. If you could see far enough to fly - you should have seen that Ranger at some distance and landed - if he was near enough to talk to you... its because you were still flying - no matter how much battery was used or available and invited his attention. Lucky you did not cop whatever penalties are applied for not complying with the State Park regulation or applied laws.
Law abiding citizens may expect cordial behavior from any law enforcers - [Language Removed by Moderator] who ignore or contravene specific National or area applied laws or regulations - in any way - deserves NO sympathy. In your own words... you gave him reason NOT to be polite - you were in contravention of State Park regulations and national no fly zones.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No wonder you do things wrong! READ my reply - WHERE did I say USA law was wrong?? Followed by a typical juvenile " I complied as soon as I was told" - you KNEW you should not be flying there - no matter you were given lee way by a more docile Ranger. Dress it up any way you want - you operated knowing that US State Parks have a blanket no flying ban with regard drones, quads, planes Multi rotor or other flying devices using a RC controller. You seem to think you can be excused by the "generosity" of one particular ranger. If you could see far enough to fly - you should have seen that Ranger at some distance and landed - if he was near enough to talk to you... its because you were still flying - no matter how much battery was used or available and invited his attention. Lucky you did not cop whatever penalties are applied for not complying with the State Park regulation or applied laws.
Law abiding citizens may expect cordial behavior from any law enforcers - [Language Removed] who ignore or contravene specific National or area applied laws or regulations - in any way - deserves NO sympathy. In your own words... you gave him reason NOT to be polite - you were in contravention of State Park regulations and national no fly zones.
My gosh, someone needs to calm down. And no, I did not KNOW. I KNEW about national parks, but I based my KNOWledge on my previous experience in state parks.

*Edited by Moderator to clean up the thread*
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: bad karma
My gosh, someone needs to calm down. And no, I did not KNOW. I KNEW about national parks, but I based my KNOWledge on my previous experience in state parks. That does not make me a moron. Idiot maybe, but not a moron. Have a nice day.
Well. That escalated quickly... generally speaking, American law enforcement officers are expected to maintain a calm polite and professional demeanor at all times. It doesn’t always work out that way but it’s something to aspire towards.
 
Well. That escalated quickly... generally speaking, American law enforcement officers are expected to maintain a calm polite and professional demeanor at all times. It doesn’t always work out that way but it’s something to aspire towards.

Agreed. Really, that was my main point from the beginning. Thanks for seeing through it all.

Hey, this got me in "Last Weeks Most Popular Topics." Woo hoo!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MTO
Sounds like a lot of old guys with attitudes.
Yep! Guilty as charged. I expect public servants to treat the public with respect. If they all did we wouldn’t be seeing protests in the street... we’ve gotten far afield here so I’ll leave it at that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jklovell
Yep! Guilty as charged. I expect public servants to treat the public with respect. If they all did we wouldn’t be seeing protests in the street... we’ve gotten far afield here so I’ll leave it at that.
I could interpret his comment as younger people expecting to be treated badly by the authorities. If that's the case, they have my sympathy. That's not a good way to grow up. Of course, in my younger days, the cops didn't wear combat boots and shave their heads either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bad karma
Yep! Guilty as charged. I expect public servants to treat the public with respect. If they all did we wouldn’t be seeing protests in the street... we’ve gotten far afield here so I’ll leave it at that.
But there's nothing in your OP that indicates that the officer was not respectful.

So he repeated his instruction for you to bring the drone in? Big deal. Nothing in that that would constitute lack of respect.

It seems more like your lack of respect for him based on his age was more in play.
 
I’m not a fan of the paramilitary styles in Law Enforcement either. It’s not the signal I’d want to send to the public nor to the officerws themselves.


But there's nothing in your OP that indicates that the officer was not respectful.

So he repeated his instruction for you to bring the drone in? Big deal. Nothing in that that would constitute lack of respect.

It seems more like your lack of respect for him based on his age was more in play.

Well, I’m not the OP so there’s that...
 

Recent Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,352
Members
104,933
Latest member
mactechnic