Flying drone in National Park?


Can we keep it real here and try to avoid sensationalizing things? This guy was NOT arrested for flying in a National Park!

From "Drone operator chased, tased by ranger at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park": "A drone operator was chased and tased by a ranger at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. The confrontation happened after park rangers say the man refused to cooperate when he was caught using a drone to video the Kilauea volcano in an area where massive crowds have been gathering at night to witness the rising lava lake". In the same article: "Several people who witnessed the situation on Saturday night reached out to Hawaii News Now -- most, describing the incident as excessive and unnecessary -- but park officials say their actions were warranted to keep a crowd of hundreds safe."

So yes, someone was arrested in a situation that got out of control and in which the park rangers may have gone overboard, but the arrest was not for flying. A follow-up of the situation reveals that the man was later convicted of failing to obey a park ranger. Nothing anywhere shows a citation, fine or arrest for flying.
Hilo Man Convicted Of Disobeying Park Ranger | USAO-HI | Department of Justice
 
They can certainly intervene and arrest if necessary if you are operating from within NPS boundaries.

A person can be arrested, rightfully or wrongfully, lawfully or unlawfully, anytime, anywhere. I think for the sake of discussion in this thread it would be a good idea to be clear about why the gent referenced in posts 39 & 40 was arrested. It wasn't for flying in a National Park. He was arrested and subsequently fined for failing to obey a park ranger. I'm not saying he was rightfully arrested or convicted, just that it wasn't for flying although flying is what precipitated the situation. Please see the links in post 41.
 
A person can be arrested, rightfully or wrongfully, lawfully or unlawfully, anytime, anywhere. I think for the sake of discussion in this thread it would be a good idea to be clear about why the gent referenced in posts 39 & 40 was arrested. It wasn't for flying in a National Park. He was arrested and subsequently fined for failing to obey a park ranger. I'm not saying he was rightfully arrested or convicted, just that it wasn't for flying although flying is what precipitated the situation. Please see the links in post 41.

I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. I've made no reference to that incident - simply pointed out that the current NPS ban on drone operations is an enforceable law with relatively stiff penalties, including a possible jail term.
 
I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. I've made no reference to that incident - simply pointed out that the current NPS ban on drone operations is an enforceable law with relatively stiff penalties, including a possible jail term.

Sorry for the confusion. Let me explain where I was coming from. Earlier in this thread reference was made to someone that had been arrested for flying in a National Park (post 39). Subsequently, I pointed out that the arrest was not for flying but for rather for failing to obey a park ranger. So, in my mind I was referring back to that situation because I thought you were too.

I'm not aware of anyone actually being arrested for flying in a NP. I'm not saying it hasn't happened. Just that I don't know about it.

In poking around online I came across this Forbes article that argues the NP's claim that "...drone use may subject individuals to six months imprisonment [emphasis added] and/or a $5,000 fine..." is absurd.
Yosemite Looks To Ban Drones By Relying On An Absurd Legal Argument
I am not qualified to take a position as to whether or not there are any teeth in the NPS claim, but I sure wouldn't want to be the pilot that had to find out in court.
 
Sorry for the confusion. Let me explain where I was coming from. Earlier in this thread reference was made to someone that had been arrested for flying in a National Park (post 39). Subsequently, I pointed out that the arrest was not for flying but for rather for failing to obey a park ranger. So, in my mind I was referring back to that situation because I thought you were too.

I'm not aware of anyone actually being arrested for flying in a NP. I'm not saying it hasn't happened. Just that I don't know about it.

In poking around online I came across this Forbes article that argues the NP's claim that "...drone use may subject individuals to six months imprisonment [emphasis added] and/or a $5,000 fine..." is absurd.
Yosemite Looks To Ban Drones By Relying On An Absurd Legal Argument
I am not qualified to take a position as to whether or not there are any teeth in the NPS claim, but I sure wouldn't want to be the pilot that had to find out in court.

Nor me. There's lots of National Forest Land we can fly though. That's where I'll do my flying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sar104
Sorry for the confusion. Let me explain where I was coming from. Earlier in this thread reference was made to someone that had been arrested for flying in a National Park (post 39). Subsequently, I pointed out that the arrest was not for flying but for rather for failing to obey a park ranger. So, in my mind I was referring back to that situation because I thought you were too.

I'm not aware of anyone actually being arrested for flying in a NP. I'm not saying it hasn't happened. Just that I don't know about it.

In poking around online I came across this Forbes article that argues the NP's claim that "...drone use may subject individuals to six months imprisonment [emphasis added] and/or a $5,000 fine..." is absurd.
Yosemite Looks To Ban Drones By Relying On An Absurd Legal Argument
I am not qualified to take a position as to whether or not there are any teeth in the NPS claim, but I sure wouldn't want to be the pilot that had to find out in court.

There's little doubt that their attempt to use 36 CFR 2.17(a)(3) as the basis for their ban on UAV operations within NPS boundaries is tenuous (OK absurd), but the question is not whether they have jurisdiction (they do), it is whether they have a legitimate regulation in place to enforce. The issue of overflights is much less ambiguous - they simply have no jurisdiction, so even if they wanted to regulate they cannot.
 
I'm just saying noise is part of life. Some may find the cacophony of a pack of screaming kids just as offensive, annoying, & disturbing as others might find drone-buzz. Do you enjoy Angles Landing more with a pack of bickering kids 20' away? We all deal with stuff we don't care for or find annoying. A drone is generally going to lift off & fly off into the distance taking most of the sound with it. Now if I can only devise a method to make the screaming brats fly away... :)

I always see these silly "Coexist" bumper stickers. There's a post in this thread from yesterday with a guy...I presume a fellow drone owner...essentially saying "Me & my kids come first, screw you & your drone." Guess he didn't get the memo? :(

I'm not sure where you are going with this. Are you saying that because people make noise you should be able to make noise with a drone? Are you saying because you dislike the sound of children you should be able to bother people with the sound of a drone as well?

You say "distant" but this won't really be the case. A person will be standing and enjoying the area and 5 people are going to be flying drones right over their heads. I can hear my drone up to 300' away. While I'm siting on Angles Landing in Zion Park I don't want to listen to 10 weed wakers 20' away.

Folks continue to toss coins & other items into geysers & springs despite the bans. I am aware of ONE drone that accidentally went down in a geyser. That single drone had absolutely ZERO EFFECT. With the notable exception of the numbnuts who likes to fly Phantoms into pools of coke & slime, most pilots won't be tossing their drone in a geyser or spring for "luck."

I'm not sure where you are getting your information from. Object thrown into geysers _have_ had effects on them. It's illegal to throw things into the geysers so you appear to be saying since some people break this law it should okay to accidently fly a drone into one. I'm also not sure why you think a drone won't affect the make up of a geyser. It can... and we are not talking about 1 drone. You really think it we allowed people to fly drones right over a geyser that people won't be lined up to get those great shots? There would be a line around the block!
 
I was at the Smoky Mountain National Park near Cherokee NC and a guy launched his drone. In just a short time a ranger approached him and asked him to bring it down because it was not allowed to fly in the park. The ranger did not charge the guy with a crime or fine him. He was very friendly about it.
That is the very day I decided I needed a drone. His was a Phantom but I don't remember which model. The name Phantom stuck in my mind and the apparent ease with which he flew it. That was about a year ago. Finally this week I have my own P4!! I'm learning a lot but I have a lot to learn.
Thanks for sharing info guys,
 
Do you enjoy Angles Landing more with a pack of bickering kids 20' away?
No, but I respect a child's right to experience a National Park in its glory over someone who feels the need to change that dynamic to get a photo from 100' above the ground.

A drone is generally going to lift off & fly off into the distance taking most of the sound with it.
I don't doubt that is what you would do. If drones were allowed to fly in National Parks, it's not what would happen all of the time. You _would_ and tens of people flying them right next to people.

Folks continue to toss coins & other items into geysers & springs despite the bans. I am aware of ONE drone that accidentally went down in a geyser. That single drone had absolutely ZERO EFFECT.

Not sure what your point is... because people break a law we should be able to fly a drone? There is a very good reason why it's only been one drone.... because it's illegal to fly drones in National Parks. Take the number of people that have flown around these geysers to get that one and then multiply that by a few thousand drones being flown. It also incorrect that one drone has not had an affect on a geyser. It has. It may be difficult to see that affect and it might not have changed much but it does have an affect. 50 years ago people dumped all kinds things into geysers to get them to go off. In many cases this killed off the geysers completely. Do you think those people cared that this is what they were doing? Those people still exist today. She me 10000 drone flyers and I'll show you several that don't care of they loose their drone into a geyser if it only means that they might have a cool video.

There is a time and place for drone use. Around a lot of people attempting to enjoy nature or a scenic view is not one of them.
 
The indications are that NPS will eventually implement some kind of graded approach to this issue, which is probably the right solution. I would expect that the very popular attractions, such as falls, geysers and other localized attractions such as El Cap and Half Dome etc., will be off limits, or maybe require permits, while the less frequented, more remote locations may be allowed with rules of use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dirty Bird
No, but I respect a child's right to experience a National Park in its glory over someone who feels the need to change that dynamic to get a photo from 100' above the ground.

This is a strawman. IMHO a drone doesn't change the dynamic anymore than do cell phones, cameras, or a myriad of other modern devices folks bring into parks.

I don't doubt that is what you would do. If drones were allowed to fly in National Parks, it's not what would happen all of the time. You _would_ and tens of people flying them right next to people.

They simply establish rules regarding where tdrones are permitted to fly.

Not sure what your point is... because people break a law we should be able to fly a drone? There is a very good reason why it's only been one drone.... because it's illegal to fly drones in National Parks. Take the number of people that have flown around these geysers to get that one and then multiply that by a few thousand drones being flown.

My point is simply people aren't going to deliberately crash their drone. Very few drones are going to go down in a geyser or spring.

It also incorrect that one drone has not had an affect on a geyser. It has. It may be difficult to see that affect and it might not have changed much but it does have an affect. 50 years ago people dumped all kinds things into geysers to get them to go off. In many cases this killed off the geysers completely.

I'm sorry but, with all due respect, this assertion just strikes me as plain silly. That single drone had about as much effect on the geyser or spring as would tossing in a few coins. A few drones going down are NOT going to prevent a geyser from spouting, nor have any discernible or measurable impact on the system. Should we ban cell phones & cameras from the parks to prevent visitors accidentally dropping them in a geysers & springs? If you have evidence to the contrary I'll be happy to consider it.

There is a time and place for drone use. Around a lot of people attempting to enjoy nature or a scenic view is not one of them.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree. There is absolutely no reason for the blanket banishment of drone use in millions of acres of public land. Should there be limits? Of course. Perhaps a process where you apply for a flight permit so the park can control how many are in the air on any given day? Fine. But blanket banishment is, IMHO, ridiculous & unnecessary. There are many ways to experience & enjoy public lands & drones are just one of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: maseman88
I'm just saying noise is part of life. Some may find the cacophony of a pack of screaming kids just as offensive, annoying, & disturbing as others might find drone-buzz. Do you enjoy Angles Landing more with a pack of bickering kids 20' away? We all deal with stuff we don't care for or find annoying. A drone is generally going to lift off & fly off into the distance taking most of the sound with it. Now if I can only devise a method to make the screaming brats fly away... :)

I always see these silly "Coexist" bumper stickers. There's a post in this thread from yesterday with a guy...I presume a fellow drone owner...essentially saying "Me & my kids come first, screw you & your drone." Guess he didn't get the memo? :(



Folks continue to toss coins & other items into geysers & springs despite the bans. I am aware of ONE drone that accidentally went down in a geyser. That single drone had absolutely ZERO EFFECT. With the notable exception of the numbnuts who likes to fly Phantoms into pools of coke & slime, most pilots won't be tossing their drone in a geyser or spring for "luck."

Grammar lesson, when you use quotations marks "", your not supposed to change the words. That's the whole point in using them. Here is my real quote. "I'm sorry but my kids and everyone's else's kids come before your right to fly your toy, and that's coming from a drone ower."
You have a real issue when it comes to kids, you mention them in a negative way every other post of yours. I used to think it was was dumb for the NP's to forbid drone use also, but from reading your posts on this forum I'm starting to see way they just did a complete ban instead of a halfway measure. The NP system if there for the enjoyment of the public, and some of that public come in a family unit (kids from infancy to teenagers), that's life. Things like cell phones and cameras that you mention are hand carried, not flying anywhere the operator intends. Accidents happen, someone dropping their phone or camera is not going to hurt anyone. But if a drone falls out of the sky (and you know they do) the NP system just doesn't want to risk that. You act as though some right was taken from you, it was not. It would be a privilege not a right if we could fly a drone in a NP. You've convinced me, it's just fine the way it is. NP=NFZ.
 
Reading comprehension lesson: The quote was prefaced with "essentially saying.". It's called "paraphrasing" & the gist of my paraphrase accurately depicts what you said then & now.

It is quite the accomplishment that you managed to breed. Impressive. Most impressive...


Grammar lesson, when you use quotations marks "", your not supposed to change the words. That's the whole point in using them. Here is my real quote. "I'm sorry but my kids and everyone's else's kids come before your right to fly your toy, and that's coming from a drone ower."
You have a real issue when it comes to kids, you mention them in a negative way every other post of yours. I used to think it was was dumb for the NP's to forbid drone use also, but from reading your posts on this forum I'm starting to see way they just did a complete ban instead of a halfway measure. The NP system if there for the enjoyment of the public, and some of that public come in a family unit (kids from infancy to teenagers), that's life. Things like cell phones and cameras that you mention are hand carried, not flying anywhere the operator intends. Accidents happen, someone dropping their phone or camera is not going to hurt anyone. But if a drone falls out of the sky (and you know they do) the NP system just doesn't want to risk that. You act as though some right was taken from you, it was not. It would be a privilege not a right if we could fly a drone in a NP. You've convinced me, it's just fine the way it is. NP=NFZ.
 
I recently checked in with Park Rangers near where I live as I wanted to fly up the coast of Presque Isle on Lake Erie and get a view of the light house from the water. I was told that it's not allowed on any State or National Park. I was thinking if I didn't fly directly over land, I should have been ok, but nope. Then I was out there taking photos and watched a Phantom glide up the beach towards the bird nesting sanctuary. Of course I didn't say anything, but I was amazed that some people actively choose not to know about restrictions and simply wait to be told they can't do what they are doing. I try to be aware and respect the regs, I hope others will also.
 
I recently checked in with Park Rangers near where I live as I wanted to fly up the coast of Presque Isle on Lake Erie and get a view of the light house from the water. I was told that it's not allowed on any State or National Park. I was thinking if I didn't fly directly over land, I should have been ok, but nope. Then I was out there taking photos and watched a Phantom glide up the beach towards the bird nesting sanctuary. Of course I didn't say anything, but I was amazed that some people actively choose not to know about restrictions and simply wait to be told they can't do what they are doing. I try to be aware and respect the regs, I hope others will also.

There's an example of NPS LE telling you anything they feel like, irrespective of reality.
 
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.
No flying in national parks....period.
 
...... The quote was prefaced with "essentially saying.". It's called "paraphrasing" & the gist of my paraphrase accurately depicts what you said then & now....
Why would you paraphrase, when his exact quote was available right there? Most likely to make your argument sound better, methinks. I was about as mad as you about the ban, but have since come to appreciate it!
 
No flying in national parks....period.

Mmmm... I think the jury is still out on this. Now, I'm not saying I think it's a good idea to fly in National Parks. I tend to lean the other way because I think there should be some places left undisturbed by drones, among other things. I say this all the while torn between that position and the idea of flying over and filming some of the spectacular scenery found in the parks.

Factually, it may be the case that if the pilot is outside the park boundaries while flying a drone that has been launched from outside the park the pilot may not be violating the regulations regarding the operation of a sUAS within the National Parks should the pilot overfly the park. This is because the FAA not the NPS controls the airspace. I'm in the middle of a correspondence about this very point with a representative of the NPs and I am pressing him to present factual information contravening this assertion. So far he has not, but as I just emailed him very recently pressing this point he may not have had a chance to respond. Should it turn out that overflying a NP while having launched from outside the park and piloting the flight from outside the park not be in violation of any law or regulation insofar as the simple act of flying goes it should be understood there may be other things for which a pilot could be cited. These include disturbing wildlife or endangering park visitors or employees, for example, by flying over them. My intention is to report back to PhantomPilots on this point if and when I hear from my contact at the parks.

Separately, there has been some discussion in this thread about a drone that crashed into a "geyser". I cannot be certain but my guess is the reference is to the Prismatic Spring within Yellowstone National Park. Putting aside for the moment that the Prismatic Spring is technically not a geyser, any notion that this incident has caused no harm is not necessarily meritorious. It may be that no observable negative effects have yet been measured in terms of the spring itself, but this may not remain so over the passage of time. Apart from the spring, there has been, I think it fair to say, enormous consternation over this incident as well as significant expense in terms of exploring possible ways to extract the aircraft which is not a simple task in this case. These are real and negative consequences.

IMHO, any sort of dismissive or cavalier attitude toward the significance of this incident would reflect badly on the entire sUAS community because we should be showing concern about this event and not dismissing it as insignificant. I fear the latter would only garner public disdain for drones and their pilots and work against the sUAS community. Just my 2¢.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: USsUASDriver
I would love to have some footage of many of the National Parks/Forest but if allowed we will have some idiot doing something crazy with the drone. I was very disappointed when I arrived at Mount Rushmore only to find out from the Park Rangers I could not fly my drone. But realistically we need this protection to keep the wilderness a wilderness. They permit various methods of travel to enjoy and explore these wonderful parks and I have to agree drones should not be allowed.
 

Recent Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

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