Flying drone in National Park?

[Kyle Hohler]

Alright I've done some research and most everything I have found was from 2014. Can someone give me some accurate information on flying a drone in a National Park? Obviously I understand using my drone responsibly but I'm curious what the ACTUAL rules and regulations are? Learn me.

 

[sar104]

The 2014 interim regulations still apply. You may not launch a drone from any National Park Service land. However, NPS does not have jurisdiction to prevent you from launching from outside a Park and then flying over it.

 

[WilliamM]

I have read on other forums multiple times that there is no flying a drone from any national park, but that does not count for National Forest. There is a grey area on that also whether it's permissible to fly over a national park as long as your not in the park itself.

Sent from my HTC 10 using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[sar104]

I have read on other forums multiple times that there is no flying a drone from any national park, but that does not count for National Forest. There is a grey area on that also whether it's permissible to fly over a national park as long as your not in the park itself.

Sent from my HTC 10 using PhantomPilots mobile app

There is nothing grey about flying over NPS land, unless it is special use or other than Class E or G.

 

[Kyle Hohler]

I have read on other forums multiple times that there is no flying a drone from any national park, but that does not count for National Forest. There is a grey area on that also whether it's permissible to fly over a national park as long as your not in the park itself.

Sent from my HTC 10 using PhantomPilots mobile app

So we can fly in a National Forest then? There is also a National Forest close by that I've thought about flying in and around too.....

 

[sar104]

So we can fly in a National Forest then? There is also a National Forest close by that I've thought about flying in and around too.....

National Forest is generally fine to launch or overfly unless there are special restrictions in place. UAV operation in a designated wilderness area is not allowed though.

 

[WilliamM]

So we can fly in a National Forest then? There is also a National Forest close by that I've thought about flying in and around too.....

Yes, this is what I have read on other forums multiple times. But I must admit I have never confirm this directly. But it definitely did seem these were folks that knew what they were talking about.

Sent from my HTC 10 using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Kyle Hohler]

National Forest is generally fine to launch or overfly unless there are special restrictions in place. UAV operation in a designated wilderness area is not allowed though.

I'm not sure I understand... what would be a "designated wilderness area"? More specifically I'm looking to fly in the Hiawatha National Forest later this month in Michigan USA

 

[sar104]

I'm not sure I understand... what would be a "designated wilderness area"? More specifically I'm looking to fly in the Hiawatha National Forest later this month in Michigan USA

Land areas, mostly administered by USFS, where no mechanized travel is permitted.

National Wilderness Preservation System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Bob Roney]

I was surprised to learn that ALL 400+ sites administered by the National Park Service do not allow UAVs currently. Here is a page from San Antonio Mission
https://www.nps.gov/saan/learn/management/drones.htm

Other sites are putting up similar pages.

 

[alokbhargava]

Better contact the national Park authorities and ask for the permission.

 

[dan84uk]

**** had no idea the rules on drones were so restrictive there! Best places to fly too

 

[Dirty Bird]

Odd how its cool to show up with a horde of brats & trample all over the park on mountain bikes, but simply taking off & flying over the park is so harmful as to be banned.

**** had no idea the rules on drones were so restrictive there! Best places to fly too

 

[sar104]

Odd how its cool to show up with a horde of brats & trample all over the park on mountain bikes, but simply taking off & flying over the park is so harmful as to be banned.

Mountain biking is only allowed on limited trails in certain parks.

 

[LCreative]

Yeah they take it pretty seriously over there if you fly in a National Park .... this is a video of a police helicopter trying to blow a Phantom out of the sky because it flew in a national park.

Scary stuff !

 

[Dirty Bird]

On foot or bike, rather moronic to allow physically traveling on the land while banning flying over it.

Mountain biking is only allowed on limited trails in certain parks.

 

[sar104]

On foot or bike, rather moronic to allow physically traveling on the land while banning flying over it.

I don't entirely agree. Physical travel is what the wilderness areas are intended for. While limited aerial operations may have little impact, the apparent proliferation of drone flights over areas of particular interest was considered to be both disruptive, in terms of noise, and potentially unsafe. I've seen videos, posted both here and elsewhere, that entirely corroborate those concerns.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Perspective: There are MILLIONS of annual visitors to a place like Yosemite. MILLIONS of people trudging around on foot, disturbing the environment, leaving behind trash, tossing coins in geysers & springs, removing things, making noise, etc.. Only a tiny fraction of the public has a drone, & an even smaller fraction visit a place like Yosemite. Maybe a few thousand flights a year? Granted we don't want drones flying over huge crowds of people, but a drone flying past Mt. Rushmore is hardly placing the public at risk. Personally I find the buzz of a drone much less annoying than that of screaming brats. This is a typical idiotic government overreaction to a non-issue.

I don't entirely agree. Physical travel is what the wilderness areas are intended for. While limited aerial operations may have little impact, the apparent proliferation of drone flights over areas of particular interest was considered to be both disruptive, in terms of noise, and potentially unsafe. I've seen videos, posted both here and elsewhere, that entirely corroborate those concerns.

 

[tcope]

On foot or bike, rather moronic to allow physically traveling on the land while banning flying over it.

It's not.. as they are not the same thing. When you are standing on a trail looking out over a beautiful landscape or viewing something like Mount Rushmore, will your experience be the same with a drone buzzing right over your head? How about flying a drone over a geyser at Yellowstone and it falls into it? These things are the same as people walking on a trail?

The ability for children to enjoy our Nation seems a little more important then someone using a drone to get a photo. I've been to a lot of National Parks. I think I'd much rather put up with 10 or 20 kids rather then 10 or 20 drones buzzing all over the place.

It's a trade off... millions of people vs preserving the National Parks. The parks system does a very good job at managing this. So much so that these people cause very little harm to the attraction. Certainly _far_ less then if it was not managed.

There is a time and place for everything.

 

[sar104]

Perspective: There are MILLIONS of annual visitors to a place like Yosemite. MILLIONS of people trudging around on foot, disturbing the environment, leaving behind trash, tossing coins in geysers & springs, removing things, making noise, etc.. Only a tiny fraction of the public has a drone, & an even smaller fraction visit a place like Yosemite. Maybe a few thousand flights a year? Granted we don't want drones flying over huge crowds of people, but a drone flying past Mt. Rushmore is hardly placing the public at risk. Personally I find the buzz of a drone much less annoying than that of screaming brats. This is a typical idiotic government overreaction to a non-issue.

Yes and no. Your characterization of the parks seems to be focused on the busy, tourist-heavy areas. In those locations the addition of drones - no doubt only a few at first, but increasing significantly as the technology becomes more widely adopted - is going to represent a safety issue with the crowds even if it doesn't add significantly to the noise pollution, hence the concern there. Similar to the multiple discussions about not flying over events.

But much of the NPS land is much quieter and peaceful, with relatively few tourists, and there the issue was the anticipated disruption to the intended environment.

I do sympathize with your overall sentiment however. I would certainly use drones in a number of local NPS areas if it were allowed, both for aerial photography and for search and rescue operations. Additionally, your comment about mountain biking notwithstanding, I'm against the growing restrictions on XC mountain biking in areas where horses, for example, are allowed.

However, in my view these are all legitimate areas where regulation has to be considered. If it didn't exist then we would also have ATVs and dirt bikes all over our parks and wilderness. At what point does the intended use of those lands become compromised?