My First negative, from a Ranger

[Ash]

Hi Guys. Myself and a friend I fly with Paul had our first negative today from a Ranger at Ellan Valley in Wales. We were capturing some nice video and stills from the dams and reservoirs. We were not overlooking anyone's property or in a position were we could have caused harm to anybody.

As I was ascending the Phantom a Ranger from Ellan Valley approached me and said I should not fly here and had I got permission. I asked him under what law should I not fly, he said it was a private estate and the area was a strategic site. To be honest I was a bit pissed at him! We weren't doing any harm. We could have gone on to do some great footage of the Victorian dams. I have been flying for 12 months now and in general the public come to us asking about the Drones they seem quite interested in this new technology , and we are grateful. We give advice and demonstrations to the ones who seem genuinely interested. I have to say we did ignore him and moved on. On exiting the site we met two other Phantom Pilots and told them our story, they too seemed a bit pissed. Is it just a case of "I don't like them"...Don't fly here!....... I think yes. I didn't see any signs saying no drone videography. There were a handful of people taking photos and video of these great dams, they weren't asked to stop filming, weren't we just doing the same ? Any thoughts on this? I would like to hear what you think.

Thanks guys.............anyway if you would like to see what we filmed please follow the link below

 

[YolevonALLin]

Were you using any ND Filters? Shooting I auto or manual?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Ash]

Hi I was using auto but just changing ev setting on camera for exposure. Thanks

 

[Ash]

YolevonALLin why do you ask? I am not sure and have no real knowledge of filters. Thanks

 

[snerd]

Well, what are the laws over there, across the pond? You do know the laws, don't you?

 

[Garcia7]

Hi Guys. Myself and a friend I fly with Paul had our first negative today from a Ranger at Ellan Valley in Wales. We were capturing some nice video and stills from the dams and reservoirs. We were not overlooking anyone's property or in a position were we could have caused harm to anybody.

As I was ascending the Phantom a Ranger from Ellan Valley approached me and said I should not fly here and had I got permission. I asked him under what law should I not fly, he said it was a private estate and the area was a strategic site. To be honest I was a bit pissed at him! We weren't doing any harm. We could have gone on to do some great footage of the Victorian dams. I have been flying for 12 months now and in general the public come to us asking about the Drones they seem quite interested in this new technology , and we are grateful. We give advice and demonstrations to the ones who seem genuinely interested. I have to say we did ignore him and moved on. On exiting the site we met two other Phantom Pilots and told them our story, they too seemed a bit pissed. Is it just a case of "I don't like them"...Don't fly here!....... I think yes. I didn't see any signs saying no drone videography. There were a handful of people taking photos and video of these great dams, they weren't asked to stop filming, weren't we just doing the same ? Any thoughts on this? I would like to hear what you think.

Thanks guys.............anyway if you would like to see what we filmed please follow the link below

I can see it from both sides and mostly its ignorance. Maybe the ranger was having a bad day, maybe he was just over cautious. But think about it from his side, would a dam be a great target for terrorism? I'd say yes. And if a terrorist had plans on this, what better device than a 4k drone to surveil a dam? Not trying to give anyone any ideas, not at all. But if the first time you see a drone and it's flying over a possible target, if you don't understand the explosion in popularity of drones and how they are just going to be commonplace soon, they it seems easy to jump to conclusions. Just my two cents.

 

[acherman]

Always have your hot wife or girlfriend with you to distract male bystanders. [emoji16]

 

[wordsmith]

Always have your hot wife or girlfriend with you to distract male bystanders. [emoji16]

Can I get one of those from DJI? Or should I try Amazon? Maybe E-bay...

 

[LuvMyTJ]

I can see the concern of it being a strategic site but if they allow ground based photography/video why would a flying camera be banned?

Always have your hot wife or girlfriend with you to distract male bystanders. [emoji16]

I would never do that... well, not that often anyways

 

[apsphoto]

In the US, the property owner has the right to say what goes on or not, so if this was truly a private estate, then they can set the rules, at least here that is the law. Things like malls here are private property, show up with a big dslr and see how fast security arrives. Also in places here in Los Angeles, like the LA Live area, show up with a "pro" camera and or a tripod and security is all over you, because it is private property, use you cell phone, no problem, but no commercial photography with out a permit. It is their discretion to decide if your equipment is an issue. So not sure what it is in Wales but you might want to find out.

Alan

 

[Meta4]

But think about it from his side, would a dam be a great target for terrorism? I'd say yes. And if a terrorist had plans on this, what better device than a 4k drone to surveil a dam?

That kind of logic doesn't stack up.
The area is open to the public and general photography is allowed.
Seriously any terrorist wanting photography of a dam can use Google Earth or go to the site, look around and use a phone or camera al they like.
Flying a drone is conspicuous and isn't going to reveal much that can't be seen and photographed with non-drone methods.
Photography isn't a crime and despite popular misconception terrorists don't usually photograph targets.

 

[LuvMyTJ]

That kind of logic doesn't stack up.
The area is open to the public and general photography is allowed.
Seriously any terrorist wanting photography of a dam can use Google Earth or go to the site, look around and use a phone or camera al they like.
Flying a drone is conspicuous and isn't going to reveal much that can't be seen and photographed with non-drone methods.
Photography isn't a crime and despite popular misconception terrorists don't usually photograph targets.

Good point my friend. Everyone in the USA should take a minute and download this PDF of the Photographers Rights sheet. I have this printed out in my road case so it is handy when it could be needed.
- Download The Photographer’s Right in PDF format -

 

[wordsmith]

Good point my friend. Everyone in the USA should take a minute and download this PDF of the Photographers Rights sheet. I have this printed out in my road case so it is handy when it could be needed.
- Download The Photographer’s Right in PDF format -
View attachment 25323

Wow! That Photographer's Rights sheet was a real eye opener. Need to go check to see if there's anything like this document for Canada, as our legal system has a few differences from the US, but as UAS users, we all have the same roadblocks when it comes to getting the shots we're after.
Thanks LuvMyTJ!
Quick addition: found one that pertains to Canada here:
http://pencanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Photography-Know-your-rights-poster.pdf

 

[Ash]

Hi Guys. ok thanks for the feedback. The dams are photographed by thousands, the location is readily availible but yes I do guess it could be an open target for terrorists. No Snerd I don't know the laws and you may think of me as being ignorant but I am not too interested. I never cause no harm and I always fly responsibly. I am not the sort of guy who would go and fly near a airport or over a nuclear plant.

Meta 4 well said, its quite open to the public and has a visitors centre.

If they ban drones with cameras I think they should ban photography. I really cannot see that flying in this area should be a problem. It seems I have no right stopping google photograph my house and the street where I live, are there laws for some and laws for others? I think a stand has to be made by all quad flyers because the laws are going to get stiffer and we will not be able to film anything of importance.

Anyway thanks to all nice to have some feedback and hear your opinions

 

[SitkaGrover]

Can I get one of those from DJI? Or should I try Amazon? Maybe E-bay...

With DJI's return policy you might want to avoid them for this kind of purchase...

 

[wordsmith]

With DJI's return policy you might want to avoid them for this kind of purchase...

Ahhhh, good point. So, E-bay then.

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Ahhhh, good point. So, E-bay then.

No, no... ya wanna go Amazon Prime, 2 day shipping and a no questions asked return policy.
Okay, back on topic before another goes off the rails.

 

[ScottyT]

Hi Guys. ok thanks for the feedback. The dams are photographed by thousands, the location is readily availible but yes I do guess it could be an open target for terrorists. No Snerd I don't know the laws and you may think of me as being ignorant but I am not too interested. I never cause no harm and I always fly responsibly. I am not the sort of guy who would go and fly near a airport or over a nuclear plant.

Meta 4 well said, its quite open to the public and has a visitors centre.

If they ban drones with cameras I think they should ban photography. I really cannot see that flying in this area should be a problem. It seems I have no right stopping google photograph my house and the street where I live, are there laws for some and laws for others? I think a stand has to be made by all quad flyers because the laws are going to get stiffer and we will not be able to film anything of importance.

Anyway thanks to all nice to have some feedback and hear your opinions

Playing devil's advocate here: Why would they ban photography in general? There is a difference between a quiet camera and a noisey quad with a quiet camera on it, in a public place that many people visit.
These things would ruin the serenity in most areas, as well as being a cause for concern when flown over people.

 

[Alarm Man]

In the UK, the land owners permission is required for takeoff. How that works for common or public land I don't know (I'm based in France, but British so have an interest).

With hindsight, it would probably have been better, to ask the Ranger for the address of the person to ask for permission, a meeting could then have been arranged where hopefully you could demonstrate the unique features of filming with a drone, and explain the safety measures you take.

Don't forget, laws, rights, and common sense are 3 completely different things.

 

[sergekouper]

The law says... that you have to obey to the ranger. You will discover that sadly more or less every piece of land in the UK belongs to someone or is managed by a council, or the national trust... leaving you with nothing exciting to shoot. I feel your pain you can trust me. Freedom is an outdated concept, we now have to live with it.

The CAA rules (again) say that you have to get permission to take off and land from a "property". You also have to check the place where you are going to fly in, and make sure that it is not a sensitive site of any kind, or that you don't risk to endanger people and property. When you think twice about it, you're mostly limited to fly in restricted areas such as RC mdels flying fields.

Now, the "limit of property" are the boundaries, and not the sky above it (in the UK, don't know about US), that means clearly that nothing stops you to take off from a public place and go through and around the park, no questions to be asked, provided that you respect all the other rules (50m,150m of structures, roads, vessels... flying recklessly, endanger people, animal and property, sensitive sites, privacy...)
Nice theory though... Good luck if you find a piece of public land to take off from, 50m away from a road...