If someone is reckless then fine them. If someone is disturbing the peace take appropriate action. That is sufficient. The control freaks running the Nany state will take as much freedom from the people that they can. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people used to mean something.
Thanks for sharing your experience. Your public service announcement is a better deterrent to illegal flying in US National Parks than any fine. I think the rule is silly. I think that a putting in a fee based permit system that allows for flying under certain conditions and safety guidelines is the best way to go. Until the rule is changed the rule breakers stand in the way of changes being made. As for the Army ban on Dji Drones - I'm behind it. Dji is arguably the best consumer technology around, but for military use I think the systems need to be proprietary, secure, and made in the USA.
Thanks for sharing your experience. Your public service announcement is a better deterrent to illegal flying in US National Parks than any fine. I think the rule is silly. I think that a putting in a fee based permit system that allows for flying under certain conditions and safety guidelines is the best way to go. Until the rule is changed the rule breakers stand in the way of changes being made. As for the Army ban on Dji Drones - I'm behind it. Dji is arguably the best consumer technology around, but for military use I think the systems need to be proprietary, secure, and made in the USA.
Hello from from Utah (13 National Park administrated areas)! Thanks for this informative video. I personally believe if a pilot is a FAA cert. Drone pilot, he or she should be able to obtain a permit for certain periods of time (and/or areas) that could be designated for such use of the park. The parks belong to us all and drone photographers should have access.
Jay Malone Exactly! I am a firm believer in respecting other's privacy and safety when it comes to flying. If the National Park Service could adopt policies that are drone friendly, as to when and under what circumstances you can fly, I would be all for it.
John Poen Could you please post the areas in Utah or put up a link of them? I know the five NP's of course, but am curious what the other 8 are. Thank you from a fellow Utahn!
utah wanderlust700 I can't find the exact article that I read, but remembered that many were State Parks or Monuments. Check out stateparks.utah.gov/?s=Drones for some recent limited use regulations info. Good luck!
This freaking country is dead! Those of us who are old enough walk around with our memories of America, the rest walk around with their illusions of it.
I'm 72. The problem is simply too many people. Our fellow younger drone fliers have no idea how free the 50s & 60s were. Nobody had a cell phone camera. Imagine that. We were lucky to have lived in those years!
The “country is dead”??? Really? I will tell you what Conservatives/Republicans said to anybody that protested the Vietnam War (my era) - “If you don’t like things in the Country, then you are free to leave”. Bye, bye.
I am going to the grand canyon next month for the first time. I was excited to get a drone, for work and recreational use, to use there and found out it was illegal to use in a national park.. so sad. I think if you have the drone registered with the FAA and are a responsible user of the drone it should be fine to use a drone.
They try to own and put regulations on the most beautiful natural places.They can easily take our FAA registration # and charge us $5.00 or $10.00 for flying in the park.I would gladly pay it and so would a lot of other pilots.
Im a drone pilot, and i reluctantly agree with the no fly zones over national parks.i once had an esc burn up midflight with absolutely no warning, i maintain my drones to keep them near perfect condition(as close to perfect as possible) i always replace questionable motors, i use quality batteries, new props etc.. but sometimes they just blow up, and to have that happen 1 or several miles deep in a national forest would truely be a disaster. Its a shame that we have to sacrifice cool videos for safety, but i get it, i dont want a bunch of firefighters risking their lives cus my battery sparks out over jellystone park.
I feel that drones should be allowed in national parks as long as the drone pilot can show he or she is registered with the FAA and flies with in the rules.
the moral of the story is don’t upload your drone footage of national parks to youtube. or just don’t mention anything about the location of the shoot.
As a licensed UAV operator I have to say I see both sides of this. If anyone can fly a drone in a federal park then there will be people getting annoyed and perhaps animals being harassed. Not all users are in it for the artistic values. The current rules are OK in my view but I would hope they would allow licensed pilots with honest intent a permit to fly and capture video much as they would a still frame photographer.
Yeah, I think licensed pilots should be able to easily obtain a permit to fly there. Give them your license number and drone registration number. Then if they find something damaged or disturbed later, they would know who to contact! Thanks for commenting!
After a 40 year career with the National Park Service, my father-in-law said he was glad to have gotten out before it became what it is today. Now, let's talk about that career. From clerk to wildlife, from cannonball circuit and Rocky Mountain, Glacier and McKinley/Denali to Developer and Supervisor, Charles Peterson served them well. We asked him "What has the NPS become that you find so bad?" The old gentleman paused a second and said "It has become a Police State." From my own experience, i can tell you an education in "law enforcement" is one of the faster routes to a career in any of the Federal Outdoor Recreation and Natural Resource agencies. Charles Peterson has been gone these last 20 years, but I can still recall the sadness in his voice. It hasn't gotten any better. The National Park Service remains a Police State. I know, everybody is "just doing their jobs." And there are a lot of good people out there ... I've worked with many of them. But there is something deeply, systemically wrong that has metastasized in our Government, our Culture, our Society, our national (lack of) conscience. John Muir, Gifford Pinchot, Lewis & Clark, and the Hanging Judge Isaac Parker would be revolted. Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Lincoln and Davis, Grant and Lee, would cry at what we've done with their sacrifice. I have no words.
I’m in Ontario, the rules and regs are so many you almost might as well give up and bury your drone. It’s just so annoying, if I stay at the regulated maximum altitude of 400’ it should not matter. What privacy are you breaking at that altitude? So much beautiful things to see and not allowed to fly, if you’re licensed their should be exceptions and as a hobbyist I shouldn’t need a commercial license or have to fill out a 15 page document just to receive permission just to fly.
Of course without regulation, drone flying in state parks could get out of control. But I don't believe banning them all together is the answer. How about just make it necessary to apply for a permit. Then that way drone usage could be kept at a set limit and those granted permits would have to learn some basic rules that would make sure they would fly them responsibly and not be too careless. Perhaps they would be required to pass a test and obtain a license. Much the same as how we get a driver's license. Of course these rules would have to be specific and reasonable. I'd have to write a lot more to get into that. But this is just a general idea of the top of my head. It may or may not be the best. The downside I could see to this, would be the State or the Govt. abusing this for profit as they are often known to do. They could easily just jack the fee's up way too high, and that's not the purpose I had in mind. But realistically, I'd be surprised if they didn't do this. Just look how much we pay to the DMV for all of their fee's. Like 'non-op'! That fee is pointless and just abusive ( for lack of a better word ). Why should we pay a yearly fee for a car we own that just sits in our garage? Okay I'm getting off subject here so I'll end on that note.
Thanks for commenting! Yeah, I think since Part 107 pilots have already paid, and passed an extensive test already, that Part 107 pilots should be able to basically give the National Park Service your license number, your aircraft registration number, and date of flying there. With that information, they would be able to contact the correct person if they found something damaged or disturbed. That's my current idea of solving this! :)
Just the thought of what our quads are made of should clue everyone in on why you shouldn't fly in a national park, or reserve. I dont know of any animals that like to eat lipo batteries and carbon fiber lol. You are doing a movie then you should have a flight path and team to be able to track your quad for recovery just in case of a failure to return etc. Good topic thanks for the vid.
Prop Dusty that’s a good point that you make. It is on all of us as quad pilots to respect the rules and the wildlife that inhabit the areas we love to explore. Parks are parks for a reason ,and we have to respect that and hopefully,understand the governments reasons for making areas protected places. As a photographer I’m allowed to photograph wild protected areas, sometimes that just has to be enough. Sometimes it’d be nice to be a bird... but alas...I’m not ;)
I do think we should be responsible, even with a downed drone. One point that has been brought up in another comment thread on here....I can find an area less than 2 miles from my house that has more wildlife per sq ft than possibly any national park.....but that area is fair game for me to fly in/over. So, I should be just as concerned flying over all areas as I would be flying over a national park.
FIRST. My professional pilot side. I fly commercially and have for years. I am more than a little familiar with the FAA, their regulations, why they have them, and how to comply with them. Having said that, as a pilot of a jet we are cruising below 10,000 at 250 knots unless under a Class B. Then it is below 200. Either way having some unlicensed person who just unboxed their new drone ABOVE the 400 foot altitude rule really does put me and my passengers at risk. At speeds a slow as 130 knots on our final approach for landing, we are just NOT going to see a UAS like a DJI Phantom 4 Pro. However we would cage an engine if one happens to find its way into the air intake. SO there are reasons for all the rules that the FAA has put out. Consider these the good ol days. There will be more regulation coming I promise. SECOND My professional UAS pilot side. Most of the UAS regulations that are there are because of stupidity. Just like they are for us in the Commercial Airline/Private Jet world. So if you are new to all of this, you must recognize EARLY ON that you now own a Federally Recognized Aircraft and you will be responsible for it. Whether you know the regulations, state, and local laws etc. So that is why there are the regulations for us all out there that fall under Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration. THIRD here is my opinion. Just as I am afforded many privileges as an Airline Transport Pilot, or ATP, I really sincerely think very strongly, that the FAA needs to start affording those of us with the FAR part 107 certification, more privileges. It works in the big aircraft world it needs to work here too. The problem is that the FAA is short of manpower. I believe this will become the case in the future I really do. On National Parks. YEP and yep. I totally think this is an area for improvement for both the Park Service and the FAA. There are plenty of FAR 107 pilots out there WHO OBTAINED the license so as to be able to fly their UAS for purposes stated here by all the comments. HOWEVER. Folks we are not going to go anywhere if we keep having people perform in a reckless and careless manner. So as people have posted here. Keep up the good work of being within compliance at all times as we fly our drones. As we get more pilots our voice will get larger too. Some Advice. Recently I called a meeting with our local UAS Drone Inspector for our FSDO, or Flight Standards District Office. That meeting gave me a lot of insight into what the FAA is trying to do establish and what their motives are. They are believe it or not, a whole lot more on our side than they are on the grumpy public. He did let me know that for UAS pilots not respecting compliance that there would be big fines, FAA Action, etc. He stated also that if they look at an individual(s) her were complained about, as, performing proper research, preflight action, and operated safely (Observers, waivers, etc) that he would have a hard time hanging fault if due diligence had been performed. I would do that. Get some fellow drone pilots in your area and head over to the local FSDO in your area. So Jay there is my short and concise, answer and opinion to your question. :)
I'm in the process of getting my part 107. I informed my uncle about this, a flight instructor. In my particular area the majority of the pilots who received their pilots license, aircraft, received it from him. When I informed him of the questions and areas that the FAA was seeking knowledge, testing and understanding on, the part 107, he was flabbergasted. To quote him, "misuse of an aircraft, is not tolerated, nor for any pilot he taught even thought of. The fact that the FAA is stating that a drone pilot would need to know some of these areas simply shows the total lack of any understanding of what type of aircraft they are dealing with." This comes from a flight instructor of over 40+ years.
Greg Lupinski I’m here to tell you the FAA does know what they’re talking about. A drone can cause major damage, injury, or even death to other individuals. Not to mention the fact that you can go out and buy this drone requires regulation. Just like anything else I could be proven harmful to individuals. There are regulations that govern that. The reason there are regulations to govern such is to provide the best possible outcome for all people involved. I happen to not only fly under an FAA Air Transport Pilot cert., I too am a FAA CFI, CFII, CFMEI. As well as an FAA 107 pilot. I commanded a Remote Pilot UAS Detatchment in the United States Army backing up air Defense artillery. I have a BS degree in Aerospace. I happen to disagree with your uncle’s assessment. The FAA controls the air space over the United States of America. And even though things are disorganized at the moment as time goes forward they will become streamlined. The folks in the FAA or most of them anyway that are heading up the UAS areas, our 107 pilots themselves and have been Remote Pilots for years. To simply state that they don’t understand meaning the FAA what a UAS/drone aircraft is is telling that your uncle may not quite understand the FAA. At least as far UAS and the FAA are concerned. There are changes coming almost on a monthly basis some of them for the better and some that still need final edits, two weeks, and input from the UAS community. So stay well-informed and compliant and I think all of this will work out for the better just give it some time and have some patience..
If drone flying over 400 ft were a problem, then how many more thousands of birds the size of a drone would be problems? If birds aren't a problem, no way drones could be a problem. If drones were the problem the FAA wanted us to think, airliners would be in danger everyday due to some birds that are even bigger and fly thousands of feet in the air.
BTW line of sight is different than out of sight..... It can be out of sight yet still in your line of site. As long as there is nothing blocking your eyes in a straight line to the drone, then it's in your line of sight, whether or not it's out of view.
It really is a crying shame that UAVs are not allowed in US National Parks, even though I understand some of the reasoning behind the decision. It just seems ludicrous that some of the best scenery in your country is nationally available to everyone except the people who are best equipped to film and promote it. It's the same in the UK: our 2 main preservers of historic sites and areas of outstanding natural beauty are National Trust and English Heritage, and both are furiously anti-drone, and that locks down most of the good stuff here as well. The places where we can fly are getting more and more restricted sadly, due to a few idiots and the relentless barrage of sensationalist and often factless media bullshit.
I agree....I really think permits should be available. That would allow the serious people to fly and the NPS would know who and what aircraft would be flying at a particular time!
I feel it's an over reach of the government, also a mistake on the national parks. Drones take beautiful footage, and this would be a great way for national parks to get some free advertisement. They can easily look back at last year's slow months and open those days to drone flights.
Em&Syl 266 -- Let me ask you, would you like to be one of the 500 people waiting around Old Faithful for it to erupt, while 5 drones fly over your head? OK, what about 20 drones? The NPS has a legitimate need to prevent drone use in crowded places for safety and in other places to prevent disturbance of wildlife and without prohibitions and the fines that go with it you and I know that way too many yahoos would fly over your head and chase wildlife. It is unfortunate, however, that every square inch of every National Park is off limits as there are many places that are not frequented by many visitors and have no unusual wildlife factors that would otherwise justify prohibitions and in those places it should be permissible to fly a drone. But, sitting around Old Faithful or hiking a trail in Yosemite is not one of the places the NPS should permit drone flights.
Raptorman0909 actually, a trail in Yosemite would be perfect-for a short ranged selfie drone to get a couple of shots of the hiker and a burst of photos in a 360 before landing. Short up, shoot, and down. Even the < 0.55 kg selfie drones are forbidden in these areas.
Oh yeah, drones would be perfect to catch great shots in a lot of places EXCEPT that there are risks when around people and the FAA and other agencies in other parts of the world expressly forbid flying over people. In addition, the joy in places like Yosemite are built on being in NATURE and the buzzing of drones kind of impedes that. Notice I said drones, plural, because that's what you would have -- if one is allowed then hundreds will be there. Sorry, but in the built up areas where larger numbers of people go there MUST be NO drones PERIOD! I should add that I own 2 drones and as I've already said I think there should be areas within most/many National Parks that are open to drones but in the areas where people or wildlife are common NO DRONES!
Raptorman0909 the biggest problem with that argument is that wildlife is everywhere, even urban areas. Don't believe me? Check out NYC's coyotes. Note that I said ON A TRAIL-away from others. Read the whole entry. Drones over people is a privacy issue, if you're in public you're fair game.
So civilians cannot fly a drone over the national parks highlighting the majestic beauty and scenery but the current Administration can open these lands up to OIL drilling ( for free, of course). Sorry to bring politics into this. But it needs to be said.
A lot of state parks are also drone unfriendly. In Arkansas, you have to file for a permit before you fly, with proof on insurance. Personally, unless someone is strafing visitors and animals with their drone, they need to be less restrictive when flying in a park. If you aren't over people and cars, and follow the FAA's rules (the actual government agency that CAN say if you can fly or not), they should allow flights.
This guy didn't do ENOUGH research. Most State Parks don't allow drone flights either, except if they have a RC field for flying planes, heli's and what not.
I think as much as I would love to fly in these places it is for the best. Height limits are for the safety of manned aircrafts and the restriction in parks is for preserving the nature. Still so many other places to fly if we view it positivity
I known in Illinois and Iowa the 2 states I have spent my life in, you can not be in the park and fly a drone. The main reason is Eagle protection and I respect that because I genuinely love and care about the birds. Especially in the Spring when the new births take place and the birds become highly protective. I do not wish to lose one of my 1400.00 plus investments. However that being said there is a work around for state parks and I have used this. If you are not “in” the park and send your drone in they really can’t touch you. Especially if you are private land and have permission from the owner to be there. I have wanted certain scenes and sites and had rangers follow my drones out of the park to me. They have no authority to legally ticket or arrest you if you meet those criteria. I’ve had so interesting discussions with them but they leave pissed because I’m right. So if your state prohibits you from flying PHYSICALLY in the park go outside get proper permission and and fly. Not saying it will work in your state but it has in IL and IA. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks for your comment! Actually, as far as I know, those are the rules for National Parks. You can't take off or land in a National park. So as you were saying, if you take off and land on another property you can work around the National Park rule. As far as most state parks go, you can fly in them. At least in Arkansas and Missouri. But I know what you are saying about respecting the wildlife, especially those eagles! I am very fond of the eagles! I personally think you should be a licensed pilot and agree to stay clear of any wildlife and fly a minimum of 75ft high. There could be some other requirements, but there should be a way that we could film the beauty of a national park! :)
You are right. I'm a certified pilot and have done a lot of research. A lot of jurisdictions across the country have tried to pass anti-drone legislation. The federal courts came out less than a year ago and ruled that only the FAA can control airspace. So as long as you fly within FAA regs they cannot touch you. What they can control is where you take off and land. Most state and federal parks had rules prohibiting you from taking off or landing within there boundaries. They can't do anything if you take off and land outside the park and fly in as long as the airspace is legal.
There are 58 National Parks and 417 National Park UNITS, all under the broad list. I own a drone and I support the National Park Service. I am glad that my enlightening hikes in our National Parks are not ruined by the drone of drones, pun intended. When I am in a designated quiet place, that's precisely what I want to hear: NOTHING but nature at its finest. Kinda like Harley's creating nothing but noise pollution, but that's another sore topic. THANK YOU for doing the right thing!
Thanks for the vid Jay. Best to share experiences like that, thanks. 5:25 "never trust wikipedia"....I totally agree....My suggestion for anyone researching before flying is use government and local authority sources, as the info they publish has to go through a checking procedure beforehand.
No flying in National Parks is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of. Probably the one place it is safest to fly and avoid people/property. Darwin Award to the law makers on this one.
I don't think congress is to blame for this one. I believe it just a "rule" that the NPS has come up with. Would like to see someone challenge them in court. These government "Agencies" are getting out of control. Congress and the Senate are the lawmakers, they need to get off their lazy ass's and sort this crap out.
The problem is with the FFA. If you allowed every Joe shmoe to fly in parks you could possibly affect wild life. Imagine every day dozens of drones in the sky might frightened birds off that might be food for another spices and so forth. The FFA is under staffed and now has to deal with uas that's hard.
I couldn't disagree with you more. Keep the drones out of our National Parks! I am in Yellowstone every year, and there have been several incidents with illegal drone flying, with one even damaging Grand Prismatic Spring. Keep our parks natural, not with some buzzing over my head and disturbing the wildlife. And yes, I am an amateur photographer - drones have no place in National Parks.
I think all the rules are stupid. Especially in my home state were you're not allowed to fly in ANY park. Not allowed to fly over a populated areas, not allowed to fly over a nonpopulated area (if it's a park). Have to fly line of sight only (impossible in a area that's 99.99% forest), can not fly within 5 miles of an airport or any landing strip. Basically the only place you ARE allowed to fly is inside your own house. Makes buying a drone just not worth the trouble when you're not allowed to do anything with it!
Exactly! That has always been my example of inadequate, ill-thought-out restrictions. How long has it been that anyone can attach a microcam on a kite and fly it at a good altitude, without there being outcries about spying and how dangerous they are? A long time, same with a ballon on a string, is that “remote control”? Some analogies need to be made with technology that has existed for a long time, and has not caused continuous plane crashes...for a start! Happy flying!
Parks belong to mankind in general. Not to some government that takes away your rights to live freely in this world. But there are idiots, the bad guys if you will that ruin things for the masses. So in order to “Serve The Masses” legislation was born. So “National” Parks should belong to.....duh... the nation. To the people, for the people.
And thanks to "some government" we have all the great National Parks to enjoy. Remember, these public lands would not exist without government setting them aside for everyone to enjoy.
This is why I launch from my boat. Additionally I'll record the landing or catch back at the boat in case my flight is questioned later. It's pretty frustrating though that the muggles on social media don't respect that we drone owners have rights when flying within the law. I've some impressive footage legally obtained from "trip advisors number 1 summer destination for 2018" that I won't show for concern of being roasted. Most folks on social media just don't get it.
I was recently in the process of getting into drone photography. But instead, the drone that just came in today is going to be sent back. The reason is because the limitations on flying drones are so overwhelming that its not worth my time and stress. When I ordered my drone about a week or so ago, I new there were restrictions, and I knew that I need to observed FAA regulations and such. However, after much more research while waiting for my drone, I find that the layer, after layer of state laws, city laws and local ordinances and so on, are just too much to sort through. Here in Virginia you can't even fly in the state parks, which I just found out yesterday. Anyway, the only loss for me is the shipping costs to send the drone back. Thanks for your video, it has added to my collection of information on this subject.
I am a drone pilot and I think the rule of flying over National parks is a very stupid rule. Now I can understand prohibiting flights while the president was there, but come on, National Parks have some of the best views. The drone I fly isn't noise at all, a weedeater makes more noise. Now most of you reading this probably fly something like the DJI line up. DJI products maybe push 95db. When you hit about 300 to 500 feet AGL you barely will hear it, if at all. So if they want to put restrictions on how close you can be to animals that is cool and smart. But not allowing flight, that's pretty rediculous.
I agree, I know they don't want drones disturbing other people and the wildlife, but me flying 100 ft plus above the ground, shouldn't be disturbing either!
Jay Malone and if your drone should fail and hit me on the head I suppose that's not a concern for you. Public place... rules to protect everyone who wants to be there. Drones as yet do not have certified safety standards and literally anyone can fly one... with no concern for the devices reliability or safety.
Please wear a helmet at the park if you are concerned about the drones. Problem solved. BTW, 20k-80k meteors (>10g) fall to earth each year as a reminder to keep that helmet on everywhere you go. See, I care about your safety. So now you don't have to slander all drone operators that they don't have a concern for YOU and they have no concern about the device's reliability or safety. I believe they all care very much about not hurting people. And enjoy an expensive photography hobby and want the utmost in reliability and safety.
Sorry I wasn't clear. You only have to wear a helmet when you hear a drone flying overhead and you think it is coming for your head then simply grab the helmet out of your backpack and put it on.
I didn’t even know it’s against the law to fly a drone at national parks! I was planning on getting my son a drone for his birthday. I figured flying over any government building is a no-no, but a park? I guess I’ll have to hit the “like button” on this channel because he just saved me and my son from a 1000.00 dollar ticket. Good grief!
Thank you! I do my best to help! Here is a newer video I posted about the subject. You might find it interesting....and it's shorter :) ua-cam.com/video/4Ogeq0zRjR8/v-deo.html
I think a few common sense restrictions are OK. Places like campgrounds or very crowded areas, Old Faithful in Yellowstone for example. But a out and out band is nonsense. Out here in the west the Federal Government is seizing and controlling more and more land, with more and more restrictions on usage.
The saddest thing about the history of self reporting safety incidents or mistakes is that this still leads to punishment due to the need to discourage the behaviour..... However, as an enthusiast and a hobbiest I disagree entirely with this mode of thought, get off the couch, get away from the tv, put on some fpv goggles and go for your fpv flight - albeit an expensive one, you can only live once, go live it and be free
I agree with the parks on this one. Some of the more crowded spaces you'd have everyone with their drones in the air at one time. That would ruin the views and the sounds of nature. Just go and enjoy the views with your eyes and not through the camera on your drone. Even as a drone owner I would hate standing there looking at a view and hear a drone go flying by.
Certainly fringes on our ability to have free speech. I can go in and with megaphones blaring to all the campers about our political views, but try to preserve images of beauty and serenity gets you shut down and a fine. I do understand that there are some conservation areas, but to close down the entire park, even the public laden areas.... too much governmental interference. Just a couple of pennies of thought.....
Bart Craytor it's easier in the US to purchase a gun at a pawn shop and then wreak havoc on the public than it is to find a place to fly your drone without hassle
nospam1950 truth hurts. If it's false information then explain why it keeps happening? Yet drones terrifying communities aren't making headlines. I'm making the statement that it's ridiculous the amount of strict regulations there are for flying a drone, in contrast with the unbelievably lax rules for firearms. You're living proof that logic is not a characteristic possessed by all people.
Pay attention to my argument. I said it's easier to buy a gun at a pawn shop than to find a place to fly your drone without hassle. In my state of Texas, which has very lenient gun laws, I can be in and out of a store with a handgun. I, being a person with no prior felonies, and more than 18 years of age, can purchase a gun with no waiting period. It's that easy. I, also living in Texas, reside close to parks which do not allow drones, airport airspaces which also do not allow drones, and a neighborhood with an HOA that does not allow drones. So pay attention to what I said, it's easier to buy a gun at a pawn shop, which I can do with no hassle, than to find a place to fly my drone, which is more difficult. You have misunderstood what I've said by thinking that I said it's easier to carry around a gun, which it is not easy to do legally as you still need classes, the qualifications, and a CHL in the state of Texas. Don't worry, no one is here to take your guns, you don't have to freak out Cletus.
national parks are some of the best places to fly and flying drones is one of the lowest impact activities ranked just before reading a book under a tree that one can do.
I’m a relative newbie to droning...and even I new you couldn’t fly in National Parks. Key words, National Parks, Ignorance of the law is never an excuse. By the way, this policy is currently under review, and is NOT expected to be permanent. But it only takes one A-hole drone pilot that harasses the wildlife, or ruins the quiet solitude of a NP, to ruin it for the rest of us. Be considerate of others.
I think with the proper rules of not harassing wildlife and keeping a set distance from people, they should be allowed at least on a permit bases (additional revenue) to part 107 holders. If you have gone through the license procedure you have demonstrated that you can and will (at the risk of loosing that license) fly safely and with common sense. As far a noise goes. If you are more than 200 feet from a person either horizontal or vertically, they are not going to hear the drone in the wide opes spaces. Compare that to the noise put out by helicopter tours over some National Parks. Question.. What has been your experience in AR and MO as far as flying in State parks and Conservation areas? I have not seen signage either at the parks or online. Is it a ask permission or beg forgiveness thing with the parks?
As far as flying in a State Park or conservation area, I haven't actually done so that I am aware of, so I can't really say. If I ended up there on a whim, I would look for any signage stating the rules. If I didn't see anything I would probably fly, if I was in class G airspace. If I knew ahead of time, I would probably call the Park office and try to find out if they have any rules or guidelines concerning drone use.
i wonder if hunting and fishing are considered harassing wildlife?? If you can hunt or fish in any park, you should be able to fly your drone. Actually how about you should be able to fly a drone anywhere you are allowed to carry a gun!
Another idiot who thinks enthusiasts who spend thousands of dollars On a Multi-rotor of any model... are interested in buzzing deer or wildlife We spend money on or build our own MULTI-ROTORS... To develop skills and engineer technology... not chase wildlife
Dude, they have these things called search warrants whereby the govt may be able to gain access to your computer and/or other media devices if they have probable cause to believe evidence of a crime may be found... maybe you should reconsider this video. Defense attorney here.
Hi. New flyer here. The NPS web site lists battlefields, trails and monuments by state which are NOT National Parks. Do you know if drone flights are banned in these areas as well?
If you can take your camera being it camera phone or SLR camera you should let people fly their droves there. We have too much busy-body government in this country. I'm all for legislation to correct this.
Your iphone or camera can't fly to disturb people and wildlife. Parks are for people to enjoy and relax. They also can't fall out of the sky from pilot error/mechanical malfunction - land on a human or animal and injure or kill. Also, a crashed drone can potentially cause a forest fire....do I need to go on? Jeez. These things I mentioned are a few of the reasons parks are NFZ.
Many National and State parks through out the U.S. has poaching issue. Drones can easily be used by poachers to located any animal or plant they seek to unlawfully harvest for profit much faster then usual. The only way to possibly deter some poachers form this method is to just ban drones from the area altogether. Also some parks issue permits mainly to third parties that fly for research studies, inspections of it wild inhabitants, along with assisting in search and rescue operations.
It is illegal to fly a drone in a National Park because the government doesn't want to be video recorded while they abduct innocent hikers and vacationers in the parks, which they've been doing for about 100 years now. National Parks are extremely dangerous places and should probably be avoided anyway. Check out David Paulides videos and, or Rusty West's YT channel for more info.
Correct me if I am wrong....but you seem to be under the misapprehension that you will only be prosecuted if you show the video on UA-cam, the law is "not fly a drone in a National Park", the video evidence is handy, but so is a video of you admitting that you flew your drone in a National Park. In this video you have admitted to breaking the law, why would you do that?????
Well they can't effectively prosecute him if they don't know which park it was, and he went out of his way to not say that. There's also not a time or date. That would be very difficult indeed to prosecute.
I don’t have any problem with NO FLYING of drones, etc IN National Parks. It’s nice to know SOME places are still left undisturbed and left alone AS A CONSTANT practice.
Felt compelled to go on the NPS website and look up Florida. To my delight, my local parks are not National Parks. Also, what caught my curiosity is that Fort DeSoto, while listed on the NPS website, is not listed as a national park. It is a National Memorial, could this be a loophole of sorts? There are other subcategories such as National Seashore, National Monument and national Preserve, aside from those listed as national parks.
In my home town there are no posted signs in any parks or on the city web site telling you that you can not fly. It is illegal to fly in any city park. Ticket trap!
I think a 9 minute flight time selfie drone shouldn't be regulated like a 27 minute 10+ mile range drone capable of carrying professional grade film equipment.
What makes the difference? Some of the smaller selfie drones are very loud and the safety isn't as reliable on them. I have heard of a lot more battery failures and crashes with the smaller drones. The Mavic Pro, Phantom, and the likes are much more reliable and safe.
Jay Malone the difference is range and flight time. A crash at your feet getting a selfie or a burst of shots in a 360 while in a 10 meter radius of the user does not have the same potential to disturb wildlife or cause property damage, especially from a sub-250 gram unit.
In my opinion National Parks are public and funded by our tax dollars so I think drones should not be restricted with a caveat of allowing experienced pilots. I fly drones and when I was first learning I was not in complete control so I ended up finding places to practice away from people. Once I had more experience, I flew in places with people but had the experience to fly with a safe distance from people. I think what is missing is some sort of certification to test a pilots ability to control the aircraft and let those certified fly in National Parks.
The laws governing National Parks are no different than any other Federal laws of audio, visual, or other method of recording, any and all federal government installations without express permission. Call it paranoia or just safety of such places, where information that can be used in preparation of violent acts and terrorism against them.
I wouldn't say don't trust wikipedia. I would say don't use it as your only source. You could just google National parks in Colorado. It would probably show up.
I agree with the ban in general. People go to the parks for peace and quiet. They want to view nature and not disturb the wildlife. On the other hand, I do think that if a permit were available, that would be an excellent balance. The permit could restrict the flight plans to fit the specific needs of a park and the visitors. For instance, flying high enough such that the drone can barely be heard from the ground. Or flying over certain areas designated for drones. Each park could customize their permit to best match the needs of everyone, including drone operators.
Yeah I totally think a permit based system would be the way to go. It could limit who and how many pilots were able to fly in any given park at one time.
I do not think all National Parks should be banned from flying do to the wide open spaces they have, with the possibility of hurting someone or thing would be zero.
Actually, by Federal Law, (FAA regulations, not NPS), you are allowed to fly a drone in a National Park, as long as you follow CFR Part 107 federal regulations. The restriction on flights in NPs is that you CANNOT TAKEOFF or LAND a Drone within a NP. In other words, you have to launch your drone outside of the NP boundary and land outside the NP boundary.
The nation parks are missing a huge promotional opportunity for their parks. More drone users would visit and that would mean more revenue for rhe park. A pictue is worth a thousand words a real life experiance is priceless.
As a new drone owner I enjoy flying my drone. I don’t think they should be allowed everywhere, but I think the same way about dogs. I don’t think dogs belong in restaurants for example, but we are talking about drones. Most NPs are natural and full of wildlife and other people. They are there for the natural environment and beauty of the park. So I think it should be left with as few unnatural and distracting things as possible. The way I look at these situation is, sure it’s ok if one or two or ten people are in the park flying drones but what if half of all people there were doing it. It probably not be fun for either party. Like what if half of people brought their dog to eat with them, it would be chaos and somebody would probably get bit. You can apply this rational to almost anything. Just think to yourself what if everybody was doing something you don’t like instead of just a couple. Of all places on Earth I am sure you can find a nice place to fly your drone where it doesn’t bother anyone.
I understand that. This is why I am a fan of the idea of applying for a permit online. Only so many permits will be issued for the day. Everyone that has a permit, must be registered with the FAA and have all of their contact information in the NPS permit database. I don't see why that wouldn't work!
I'd hate to see more government regulations such as, only drones flying above 200' are allowed in National Parks. Ridicules right? Besides they probably disturb natural wildlife, especially birds. Last I checked, National Parks are meant to be enjoyed by all with minimal impact.
You can upload your footage as long as you are foreign tourist and you wait until you are back home to upload it; plus you make sure that you don't actually get caught with it in the park. I very much doubt they will chase after you if you are from another country; especially if they are no signage saying that its prohibited. Jay should send his footage to someone abroad that he knows then they can upload without mentioning his name.
I'm a big fan of prohibiting drones on and above units of land administered by the National Park Service. Now the Wikipedia was not incorrect as there are only 59 units of land classified as "National Parks." However, the National Park Service administers about 417 units of land, of which National Parks are only one type of designation. The National Park Service also administers National Monuments, National Recreation Areas (the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also administer some of these), National Seashores, National Lakeshores, National Rivers, National Battlefields, Parkways (Blue Ridge and Natchez Trace come to mind) and some others I haven't mentioned. All four of these federal land management agencies also have wilderness areas designated by Congress. Federal law prohibits the use of aircraft (landing and takeoff) and the use and possession of mechanized equipment in wilderness areas, including bicycles, carts, wagons, drones, helicopters and similar. Drone operators are expected to know what they are doing and to have nearly as much knowledge of where they are flying as an aircraft pilot who see these laws listed on their sectional charts. Also, don't even think about operating a drone anywhere near a wildland fire. Please look this subject up to find out how drones have caused some near misses and have caused the entire aviation operation of fires, both big and small, to be shut down, putting lives and property in jeopardy. If you see smoke from a wildland fire keep that drone on the ground!!
The state and national parks belong to we the people. I fly all over Rainier National Park and will continue to do so. We have the ability to share the beauty of wilderness areas with people that don’t have the ability to visit these places. These parks belong to every citizen. Don’t ever let bureaucrats keep you from life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I had the same thing, but with a handheld camera closed trail area, but refused to talk to the ranger, He showed up at my house 3 times during a weekend. I pleaded innocent at pretrial, and asked for pretrial discovery, a month later called the prosecuter and agreed on no contest and $350 vs $1000. No lawyer needed, I think i could haev gone down to 250 or 300 but I was tired of it all.
The rules that I have mentioned are for the US and the FAA. You would need to check with the organization that governs your Civil Aviation in your country.
There should be some rules to stop idiots from recklessly taking over the air of national parks but at the same time these parks are the PEOPLES parks. It’s crazy how an entity that supposed to work for us is constantly telling us what we can’t do and is always trying to fine us or incarcerate us for doing it. I would understand at a place that is prone to wildfires and things like that but for the most part there is no real danger involved.
Yes, I believe that an online application to obtain a day permit would work. Limit the number of permits given for the day. Require all contact information and drone registration numbers. This would limit the park from being overrun with drones, but yet allow the beauty to be captured!
I challenge the administration to justify any restriction of recreational drone photography over publicly held park lands. Restrictions concerning safety and privacy in bathing campgrounds, military or commercial development are reasonable. However, public lands are public and should be free for safe recreational ecologically friendly use .
Bad law, left unchallenged, remains bad law. Well considered regulation is the result of litigation, and legislation. Arbitrary emergency rule usually has sunset clause by which time well considered legislation and policy can be tried and tested. Best wishes, and please push the envelope.
The FAA has a clunky app for drone pilots called B4Ufly. It's designed to plan your next adventure. However it's really hard to save pinned locations. I does list all national parks, TFR's and other restricted areas. Almost everywhere has some kind of restriction or warning. Especially because of airports and military bases. But the app does say I can fly inside (most of) all 17 national monuments in my region. For example: I pinned an area of White Sands NM. Ok to fly according to the app. But the park website says drones prohibited because of the adjacent military base. Probably best to avoid that place no matter where. Common sense.
You are very true about the clunky app. The FAA should step up their game if they want pilots following all the rules! The confusing part is that the NPS makes the rules about the parks and monuments. Some of the monuments are allowed to fly in the area, but the NPS rules are you cannot take off or land on NPS land.
The NPS oversees several areas that are not listed as "National Parks:" National Monuments, National Memorials, National Historic Sites, National Historic Trails, , National Recreation Areas, National Historic Parks, etc. For example, the NPS website lists 24 areas ran by NPS in AZ but only 3 are technically "National Parks." Could the "park" you flew over be one of these? Does the rule include these other areas?
We are just talking about National Parks here and seem to be assuming that State Parks are okay, I suggest you enter your State Parks' website and check before you fly. Florida State parks do not permit personal drone flying, However, and I haven't confirmed this yet, if you are part 107 you can fly after asking for permission and I believe is under the discretion of the Ranger, not sure if you need to buy a permit, soon to find out.
I am all paranoid now. I kind of regret buying a drone. Not worth the hassle. I too found myself removing a video because I was unknowingly flying in restricted area. I thought the app would alert you of those areas by that did not happen.
wow you have rocketed in less than a year, gained 11000 subscribers, thats awesome man, only just hit 1000 and no change yet in growing since hitting in the other week
Yes, I found it hard to accept that people don't watch all of my videos. But I understand that we always don't have time, or just not always interested in that particular video. I have a handful of channels that I watch all of their videos. For instance, I don't miss a Casey Neistat or Peter McKinnon video! lol But we just have to accept that we will NEVER get everyone watching!
So, people are expected to pay a tax (yes, that is what it is) to the federal/national government to "register" a drone, but then cannot fly that drone in a national park? Seems legit.
What do you think about this National Park Service Rule? Also, check out the US Army Ban On DJI Drones! ua-cam.com/video/LimZVvr_ZYQ/v-deo.html
If someone is reckless then fine them. If someone is disturbing the peace take appropriate action.
That is sufficient.
The control freaks running the Nany state will take as much freedom from the people that they can. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people used to mean something.
Thanks for sharing your experience. Your public service announcement is a better deterrent to illegal flying in US National Parks than any fine. I think the rule is silly. I think that a putting in a fee based permit system that allows for flying under certain conditions and safety guidelines is the best way to go. Until the rule is changed the rule breakers stand in the way of changes being made. As for the Army ban on Dji Drones - I'm behind it. Dji is arguably the best consumer technology around, but for military use I think the systems need to be proprietary, secure, and made in the USA.
Thanks for sharing your experience. Your public service announcement is a better deterrent to illegal flying in US National Parks than any fine. I think the rule is silly. I think that a putting in a fee based permit system that allows for flying under certain conditions and safety guidelines is the best way to go. Until the rule is changed the rule breakers stand in the way of changes being made. As for the Army ban on Dji Drones - I'm behind it. Dji is arguably the best consumer technology around, but for military use I think the systems need to be proprietary, secure, and made in the USA.
How about designated federal wilderness area?
I think you'e lonely and pathetic
No drone rule are bullshit. "WE The People" own those parks and not a one of us had the chance to vote on the bill.
Hello from from Utah (13 National Park administrated areas)! Thanks for this informative video. I personally believe if a pilot is a FAA cert. Drone pilot, he or she should be able to obtain a permit for certain periods of time (and/or areas) that could be designated for such use of the park. The parks belong to us all and drone photographers should have access.
That is kinda my feelings. I think pilots that go to the trouble of becoming Part 107 licensed pilots, would respect the area. :)
Jay Malone Exactly! I am a firm believer in respecting other's privacy and safety when it comes to flying. If the National Park Service could adopt policies that are drone friendly, as to when and under what circumstances you can fly, I would be all for it.
John Poen Could you please post the areas in Utah or put up a link of them? I know the five NP's of course, but am curious what the other 8 are. Thank you from a fellow Utahn!
utah wanderlust700 I can't find the exact article that I read, but remembered that many were State Parks or Monuments. Check out stateparks.utah.gov/?s=Drones for some recent limited use regulations info. Good luck!
John Poen Thank you!
No running jumping swimming playing or drone flying, have fun, it's your park.
This freaking country is dead!
Those of us who are old enough walk around with our memories of America, the rest walk around with their illusions of it.
I hear you, felt the same way, and I wasn't even born here, sad.
Pretty much. It keeps getting worse every year.
Haha even truer today
I'm 72. The problem is simply too many people. Our fellow younger drone fliers have no idea how free the 50s & 60s were. Nobody had a cell phone camera. Imagine that. We were lucky to have lived in those years!
The “country is dead”??? Really? I will tell you what Conservatives/Republicans said to anybody that protested the Vietnam War (my era) - “If you don’t like things in the Country, then you are free to leave”. Bye, bye.
I am going to the grand canyon next month for the first time. I was excited to get a drone, for work and recreational use, to use there and found out it was illegal to use in a national park.. so sad. I think if you have the drone registered with the FAA and are a responsible user of the drone it should be fine to use a drone.
Yes, they should have a way to allow for a day permit or something. They could control the amount of drones that way.
They try to own and put regulations on the most beautiful natural places.They can easily take our FAA registration # and charge us $5.00 or $10.00 for flying in the park.I would gladly pay it and so would a lot of other pilots.
Im a drone pilot, and i reluctantly agree with the no fly zones over national parks.i once had an esc burn up midflight with absolutely no warning, i maintain my drones to keep them near perfect condition(as close to perfect as possible) i always replace questionable motors, i use quality batteries, new props etc.. but sometimes they just blow up, and to have that happen 1 or several miles deep in a national forest would truely be a disaster. Its a shame that we have to sacrifice cool videos for safety, but i get it, i dont want a bunch of firefighters risking their lives cus my battery sparks out over jellystone park.
I feel that drones should be allowed in national parks as long as the drone pilot can show he or she is registered with the FAA and flies with in the rules.
That's my feelings too! :)
why register....stupid
the moral of the story is don’t upload your drone footage of national parks to youtube. or just don’t mention anything about the location of the shoot.
or throw out our government and follow the constitution.
...or use FB / Instagram stories that are gone in 24 hours! LOL
Should be left up to each park. Maybe parks could have “drone zones”
I agree. I also think that permits could be issued. Only so many per park, per day.
Godd idea I was thinking this and was going to talk to the state parks to to see where drones could be flown despite they highly discourage
As a licensed UAV operator I have to say I see both sides of this. If anyone can fly a drone in a federal park then there will be people getting annoyed and perhaps animals being harassed. Not all users are in it for the artistic values. The current rules are OK in my view but I would hope they would allow licensed pilots with honest intent a permit to fly and capture video much as they would a still frame photographer.
Yeah, I think licensed pilots should be able to easily obtain a permit to fly there. Give them your license number and drone registration number. Then if they find something damaged or disturbed later, they would know who to contact! Thanks for commenting!
After a 40 year career with the National Park Service, my father-in-law said he was glad to have gotten out before it became what it is today. Now, let's talk about that career. From clerk to wildlife, from cannonball circuit and Rocky Mountain, Glacier and McKinley/Denali to Developer and Supervisor, Charles Peterson served them well. We asked him "What has the NPS become that you find so bad?" The old gentleman paused a second and said "It has become a Police State."
From my own experience, i can tell you an education in "law enforcement" is one of the faster routes to a career in any of the Federal Outdoor Recreation and Natural Resource agencies. Charles Peterson has been gone these last 20 years, but I can still recall the sadness in his voice. It hasn't gotten any better. The National Park Service remains a Police State.
I know, everybody is "just doing their jobs." And there are a lot of good people out there ... I've worked with many of them. But there is something deeply, systemically wrong that has metastasized in our Government, our Culture, our Society, our national (lack of) conscience. John Muir, Gifford Pinchot, Lewis & Clark, and the Hanging Judge Isaac Parker would be revolted. Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Lincoln and Davis, Grant and Lee, would cry at what we've done with their sacrifice. I have no words.
Thanks for sharing!
I’m in Ontario, the rules and regs are so many you almost might as well give up and bury your drone. It’s just so annoying, if I stay at the regulated maximum altitude of 400’ it should not matter. What privacy are you breaking at that altitude? So much beautiful things to see and not allowed to fly, if you’re licensed their should be exceptions and as a hobbyist I shouldn’t need a commercial license or have to fill out a 15 page document just to receive permission just to fly.
Of course without regulation, drone flying in state parks could get out of control. But I don't believe banning them all together is the answer. How about just make it necessary to apply for a permit. Then that way drone usage could be kept at a set limit and those granted permits would have to learn some basic rules that would make sure they would fly them responsibly and not be too careless. Perhaps they would be required to pass a test and obtain a license. Much the same as how we get a driver's license. Of course these rules would have to be specific and reasonable. I'd have to write a lot more to get into that. But this is just a general idea of the top of my head. It may or may not be the best. The downside I could see to this, would be the State or the Govt. abusing this for profit as they are often known to do. They could easily just jack the fee's up way too high, and that's not the purpose I had in mind. But realistically, I'd be surprised if they didn't do this. Just look how much we pay to the DMV for all of their fee's. Like 'non-op'! That fee is pointless and just abusive ( for lack of a better word ). Why should we pay a yearly fee for a car we own that just sits in our garage? Okay I'm getting off subject here so I'll end on that note.
Thanks for commenting! Yeah, I think since Part 107 pilots have already paid, and passed an extensive test already, that Part 107 pilots should be able to basically give the National Park Service your license number, your aircraft registration number, and date of flying there. With that information, they would be able to contact the correct person if they found something damaged or disturbed. That's my current idea of solving this! :)
Just the thought of what our quads are made of should clue everyone in on why you shouldn't fly in a national park, or reserve. I dont know of any animals that like to eat lipo batteries and carbon fiber lol. You are doing a movie then you should have a flight path and team to be able to track your quad for recovery just in case of a failure to return etc. Good topic thanks for the vid.
Prop Dusty that’s a good point that you make. It is on all of us as quad pilots to respect the rules and the wildlife that inhabit the areas we love to explore. Parks are parks for a reason ,and we have to respect that and hopefully,understand the governments reasons for making areas protected places. As a photographer I’m allowed to photograph wild protected areas, sometimes that just has to be enough. Sometimes it’d be nice to be a bird... but alas...I’m not ;)
I do think we should be responsible, even with a downed drone. One point that has been brought up in another comment thread on here....I can find an area less than 2 miles from my house that has more wildlife per sq ft than possibly any national park.....but that area is fair game for me to fly in/over. So, I should be just as concerned flying over all areas as I would be flying over a national park.
A license is when the government steals one of your rights & sells it back to you. I'm against the ban.
FIRST. My professional pilot side. I fly commercially and have for years. I am more than a little familiar with the FAA, their regulations, why they have them, and how to comply with them. Having said that, as a pilot of a jet we are cruising below 10,000 at 250 knots unless under a Class B. Then it is below 200. Either way having some unlicensed person who just unboxed their new drone ABOVE the 400 foot altitude rule really does put me and my passengers at risk. At speeds a slow as 130 knots on our final approach for landing, we are just NOT going to see a UAS like a DJI Phantom 4 Pro. However we would cage an engine if one happens to find its way into the air intake. SO there are reasons for all the rules that the FAA has put out. Consider these the good ol days. There will be more regulation coming I promise.
SECOND My professional UAS pilot side. Most of the UAS regulations that are there are because of stupidity. Just like they are for us in the Commercial Airline/Private Jet world. So if you are new to all of this, you must recognize EARLY ON that you now own a Federally Recognized Aircraft and you will be responsible for it. Whether you know the regulations, state, and local laws etc. So that is why there are the regulations for us all out there that fall under Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration.
THIRD here is my opinion. Just as I am afforded many privileges as an Airline Transport Pilot, or ATP, I really sincerely think very strongly, that the FAA needs to start affording those of us with the FAR part 107 certification, more privileges. It works in the big aircraft world it needs to work here too. The problem is that the FAA is short of manpower. I believe this will become the case in the future I really do.
On National Parks. YEP and yep. I totally think this is an area for improvement for both the Park Service and the FAA. There are plenty of FAR 107 pilots out there WHO OBTAINED the license so as to be able to fly their UAS for purposes stated here by all the comments. HOWEVER. Folks we are not going to go anywhere if we keep having people perform in a reckless and careless manner. So as people have posted here. Keep up the good work of being within compliance at all times as we fly our drones. As we get more pilots our voice will get larger too.
Some Advice. Recently I called a meeting with our local UAS Drone Inspector for our FSDO, or Flight Standards District Office. That meeting gave me a lot of insight into what the FAA is trying to do establish and what their motives are. They are believe it or not, a whole lot more on our side than they are on the grumpy public. He did let me know that for UAS pilots not respecting compliance that there would be big fines, FAA Action, etc. He stated also that if they look at an individual(s) her were complained about, as, performing proper research, preflight action, and operated safely (Observers, waivers, etc) that he would have a hard time hanging fault if due diligence had been performed.
I would do that. Get some fellow drone pilots in your area and head over to the local FSDO in your area.
So Jay there is my short and concise, answer and opinion to your question. :)
Such a great response! I love hearing the views of others, especially someone who flies commercial as well! Thank you!
I'm in the process of getting my part 107. I informed my uncle about this, a flight instructor. In my particular area the majority of the pilots who received their pilots license, aircraft, received it from him. When I informed him of the questions and areas that the FAA was seeking knowledge, testing and understanding on, the part 107, he was flabbergasted. To quote him, "misuse of an aircraft, is not tolerated, nor for any pilot he taught even thought of. The fact that the FAA is stating that a drone pilot would need to know some of these areas simply shows the total lack of any understanding of what type of aircraft they are dealing with." This comes from a flight instructor of over 40+ years.
Well said! Appreciate that thoughtful comments :-)
Greg Lupinski I’m here to tell you the FAA does know what they’re talking about. A drone can cause major damage, injury, or even death to other individuals. Not to mention the fact that you can go out and buy this drone requires regulation.
Just like anything else I could be proven harmful to individuals. There are regulations that govern that. The reason there are regulations to govern such is to provide the best possible outcome for all people involved.
I happen to not only fly under an FAA Air Transport Pilot cert., I too am a FAA CFI, CFII, CFMEI. As well as an FAA 107 pilot. I commanded a Remote Pilot UAS Detatchment in the United States Army backing up air Defense artillery.
I have a BS degree in Aerospace.
I happen to disagree with your uncle’s assessment. The FAA controls the air space over the United States of America. And even though things are disorganized at the moment as time goes forward they will become streamlined.
The folks in the FAA or most of them anyway that are heading up the UAS areas, our 107 pilots themselves and have been Remote Pilots for years.
To simply state that they don’t understand meaning the FAA what a UAS/drone aircraft is is telling that your uncle may not quite understand the FAA. At least as far UAS and the FAA are concerned.
There are changes coming almost on a monthly basis some of them for the better and some that still need final edits, two weeks, and input from the UAS community.
So stay well-informed and compliant and I think all of this will work out for the better just give it some time and have some patience..
If drone flying over 400 ft were a problem, then how many more thousands of birds the size of a drone would be problems? If birds aren't a problem, no way drones could be a problem. If drones were the problem the FAA wanted us to think, airliners would be in danger everyday due to some birds that are even bigger and fly thousands of feet in the air.
BTW line of sight is different than out of sight..... It can be out of sight yet still in your line of site. As long as there is nothing blocking your eyes in a straight line to the drone, then it's in your line of sight, whether or not it's out of view.
It really is a crying shame that UAVs are not allowed in US National Parks, even though I understand some of the reasoning behind the decision. It just seems ludicrous that some of the best scenery in your country is nationally available to everyone except the people who are best equipped to film and promote it. It's the same in the UK: our 2 main preservers of historic sites and areas of outstanding natural beauty are National Trust and English Heritage, and both are furiously anti-drone, and that locks down most of the good stuff here as well. The places where we can fly are getting more and more restricted sadly, due to a few idiots and the relentless barrage of sensationalist and often factless media bullshit.
I agree....I really think permits should be available. That would allow the serious people to fly and the NPS would know who and what aircraft would be flying at a particular time!
I feel it's an over reach of the government, also a mistake on the national parks. Drones take beautiful footage, and this would be a great way for national parks to get some free advertisement. They can easily look back at last year's slow months and open those days to drone flights.
Excuse me, but you didn't mention consulting B4UFly or AirMap or even an aeronautical chart, as part of your pre-flight homework. Why?
Em&Syl 266 -- Let me ask you, would you like to be one of the 500 people waiting around Old Faithful for it to erupt, while 5 drones fly over your head? OK, what about 20 drones? The NPS has a legitimate need to prevent drone use in crowded places for safety and in other places to prevent disturbance of wildlife and without prohibitions and the fines that go with it you and I know that way too many yahoos would fly over your head and chase wildlife. It is unfortunate, however, that every square inch of every National Park is off limits as there are many places that are not frequented by many visitors and have no unusual wildlife factors that would otherwise justify prohibitions and in those places it should be permissible to fly a drone. But, sitting around Old Faithful or hiking a trail in Yosemite is not one of the places the NPS should permit drone flights.
Raptorman0909 actually, a trail in Yosemite would be perfect-for a short ranged selfie drone to get a couple of shots of the hiker and a burst of photos in a 360 before landing. Short up, shoot, and down.
Even the < 0.55 kg selfie drones are forbidden in these areas.
Oh yeah, drones would be perfect to catch great shots in a lot of places EXCEPT that there are risks when around people and the FAA and other agencies in other parts of the world expressly forbid flying over people. In addition, the joy in places like Yosemite are built on being in NATURE and the buzzing of drones kind of impedes that. Notice I said drones, plural, because that's what you would have -- if one is allowed then hundreds will be there. Sorry, but in the built up areas where larger numbers of people go there MUST be NO drones PERIOD! I should add that I own 2 drones and as I've already said I think there should be areas within most/many National Parks that are open to drones but in the areas where people or wildlife are common NO DRONES!
Raptorman0909 the biggest problem with that argument is that wildlife is everywhere, even urban areas. Don't believe me? Check out NYC's coyotes. Note that I said ON A TRAIL-away from others.
Read the whole entry.
Drones over people is a privacy issue, if you're in public you're fair game.
So civilians cannot fly a drone over the national parks highlighting the majestic beauty and scenery but the current Administration can open these lands up to OIL drilling ( for free, of course). Sorry to bring politics into this. But it needs to be said.
One of them makes them money ...... :(
You’re an idiot. Drilling is not allowed in any National Park.
A lot of state parks are also drone unfriendly. In Arkansas, you have to file for a permit before you fly, with proof on insurance. Personally, unless someone is strafing visitors and animals with their drone, they need to be less restrictive when flying in a park. If you aren't over people and cars, and follow the FAA's rules (the actual government agency that CAN say if you can fly or not), they should allow flights.
This guy didn't do ENOUGH research. Most State Parks don't allow drone flights either, except if they have a RC field for flying planes, heli's and what not.
Too much government regulation.
Pretty much truth!
Ron Morris Amen brother!
Agreed !!!
It's all about money
I think as much as I would love to fly in these places it is for the best. Height limits are for the safety of manned aircrafts and the restriction in parks is for preserving the nature. Still so many other places to fly if we view it positivity
I known in Illinois and Iowa the 2 states I have spent my life in, you can not be in the park and fly a drone. The main reason is Eagle protection and I respect that because I genuinely love and care about the birds. Especially in the Spring when the new births take place and the birds become highly protective. I do not wish to lose one of my 1400.00 plus investments. However that being said there is a work around for state parks and I have used this. If you are not “in” the park and send your drone in they really can’t touch you. Especially if you are private land and have permission from the owner to be there. I have wanted certain scenes and sites and had rangers follow my drones out of the park to me. They have no authority to legally ticket or arrest you if you meet those criteria. I’ve had so interesting discussions with them but they leave pissed because I’m right. So if your state prohibits you from flying PHYSICALLY in the park go outside get proper permission and and fly. Not saying it will work in your state but it has in IL and IA. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks for your comment! Actually, as far as I know, those are the rules for National Parks. You can't take off or land in a National park. So as you were saying, if you take off and land on another property you can work around the National Park rule. As far as most state parks go, you can fly in them. At least in Arkansas and Missouri. But I know what you are saying about respecting the wildlife, especially those eagles! I am very fond of the eagles! I personally think you should be a licensed pilot and agree to stay clear of any wildlife and fly a minimum of 75ft high. There could be some other requirements, but there should be a way that we could film the beauty of a national park! :)
Right, Period. I do tend to scout out my locations before I fly. I take my good binoclars so I am able to see the life in the trees.
You are right. I'm a certified pilot and have done a lot of research. A lot of jurisdictions across the country have tried to pass anti-drone legislation. The federal courts came out less than a year ago and ruled that only the FAA can control airspace. So as long as you fly within FAA regs they cannot touch you. What they can control is where you take off and land. Most state and federal parks had rules prohibiting you from taking off or landing within there boundaries. They can't do anything if you take off and land outside the park and fly in as long as the airspace is legal.
Generally, when you're using the internet to find information about a specific thing, it helps to actually google the thing.
Did you watch my video?
There are 58 National Parks and 417 National Park UNITS, all under the broad list. I own a drone and I support the National Park Service. I am glad that my enlightening hikes in our National Parks are not ruined by the drone of drones, pun intended. When I am in a designated quiet place, that's precisely what I want to hear: NOTHING but nature at its finest. Kinda like Harley's creating nothing but noise pollution, but that's another sore topic. THANK YOU for doing the right thing!
You're right! Here is an updated video that you might enjoy! ua-cam.com/video/4Ogeq0zRjR8/v-deo.html
Thanks for the vid Jay. Best to share experiences like that, thanks. 5:25 "never trust wikipedia"....I totally agree....My suggestion for anyone researching before flying is use government and local authority sources, as the info they publish has to go through a checking procedure beforehand.
You are right! So glad to have you watching and commenting!
No flying in National Parks is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of. Probably the one place it is safest to fly and avoid people/property. Darwin Award to the law makers on this one.
I appreciate your input!
I don't think congress is to blame for this one. I believe it just a "rule" that the NPS has come up with. Would like to see someone challenge them in court. These government "Agencies" are getting out of control. Congress and the Senate are the lawmakers, they need to get off their lazy ass's and sort this crap out.
The problem is with the FFA. If you allowed every Joe shmoe to fly in parks you could possibly affect wild life. Imagine every day dozens of drones in the sky might frightened birds off that might be food for another spices and so forth. The FFA is under staffed and now has to deal with uas that's hard.
No flying IN the parks, but if you are positioned OUTSIDE the park, you can fly over without being arrested. There is a video of Devils Tower.
I couldn't disagree with you more. Keep the drones out of our National Parks! I am in Yellowstone every year, and there have been several incidents with illegal drone flying, with one even damaging Grand Prismatic Spring. Keep our parks natural, not with some buzzing over my head and disturbing the wildlife. And yes, I am an amateur photographer - drones have no place in National Parks.
I think all the rules are stupid. Especially in my home state were you're not allowed to fly in ANY park. Not allowed to fly over a populated areas, not allowed to fly over a nonpopulated area (if it's a park). Have to fly line of sight only (impossible in a area that's 99.99% forest), can not fly within 5 miles of an airport or any landing strip. Basically the only place you ARE allowed to fly is inside your own house. Makes buying a drone just not worth the trouble when you're not allowed to do anything with it!
Exactly! That has always been my example of inadequate, ill-thought-out restrictions. How long has it been that anyone can attach a microcam on a kite and fly it at a good altitude, without there being outcries about spying and how dangerous they are? A long time, same with a ballon on a string, is that “remote control”?
Some analogies need to be made with technology that has existed for a long time, and has not caused continuous plane crashes...for a start! Happy flying!
I think they should give scheduled approval flight plans.
Agreed!
Parks belong to mankind in general. Not to some government that takes away your rights to live freely in this world. But there are idiots, the bad guys if you will that ruin things for the masses. So in order to “Serve The Masses” legislation was born. So “National” Parks should belong to.....duh... the nation. To the people, for the people.
And thanks to "some government" we have all the great National Parks to enjoy. Remember, these public lands would not exist without government setting them aside for everyone to enjoy.
😮
Might wanna oughta explain to folks about the difference between a "National Park" and a "National Forest". Just fyi
This is why I launch from my boat. Additionally I'll record the landing or catch back at the boat in case my flight is questioned later. It's pretty frustrating though that the muggles on social media don't respect that we drone owners have rights when flying within the law. I've some impressive footage legally obtained from "trip advisors number 1 summer destination for 2018" that I won't show for concern of being roasted. Most folks on social media just don't get it.
Who owns the national parks? Huh, makes you wonder.
Trump
Papa Trump
So sad that you couldn't upload the video :-(
I was recently in the process of getting into drone photography. But instead, the drone that just came in today is going to be sent back. The reason is because the limitations on flying drones are so overwhelming that its not worth my time and stress. When I ordered my drone about a week or so ago, I new there were restrictions, and I knew that I need to observed FAA regulations and such. However, after much more research while waiting for my drone, I find that the layer, after layer of state laws, city laws and local ordinances and so on, are just too much to sort through. Here in Virginia you can't even fly in the state parks, which I just found out yesterday. Anyway, the only loss for me is the shipping costs to send the drone back. Thanks for your video, it has added to my collection of information on this subject.
For these reasons, I sold my drone a year or so ago! Just isn’t worth it for me.
I am a drone pilot and I think the rule of flying over National parks is a very stupid rule. Now I can understand prohibiting flights while the president was there, but come on, National Parks have some of the best views. The drone I fly isn't noise at all, a weedeater makes more noise. Now most of you reading this probably fly something like the DJI line up. DJI products maybe push 95db. When you hit about 300 to 500 feet AGL you barely will hear it, if at all. So if they want to put restrictions on how close you can be to animals that is cool and smart. But not allowing flight, that's pretty rediculous.
Thanks for your input!
I think that is a silly law. I personally feel the parks are or should be public. Don't make sense to me.
Mary B agreed
I agree, I know they don't want drones disturbing other people and the wildlife, but me flying 100 ft plus above the ground, shouldn't be disturbing either!
Jay Malone and if your drone should fail and hit me on the head I suppose that's not a concern for you. Public place... rules to protect everyone who wants to be there. Drones as yet do not have certified safety standards and literally anyone can fly one... with no concern for the devices reliability or safety.
Please wear a helmet at the park if you are concerned about the drones. Problem solved. BTW, 20k-80k meteors (>10g) fall to earth each year as a reminder to keep that helmet on everywhere you go.
See, I care about your safety. So now you don't have to slander all drone operators that they don't have a concern for YOU and they have no concern about the device's reliability or safety. I believe they all care very much about not hurting people. And enjoy an expensive photography hobby and want the utmost in reliability and safety.
Sorry I wasn't clear. You only have to wear a helmet when you hear a drone flying overhead and you think it is coming for your head then simply grab the helmet out of your backpack and put it on.
i think it is dumb, would love to see some footage of the buffalo river !
That would be nice!
I think it makes total sense banning drones from flying over parks--state, provincial and national.
I didn’t even know it’s against the law to fly a drone at national parks! I was planning on getting my son a drone for his birthday. I figured flying over any government building is a no-no, but a park? I guess I’ll have to hit the “like button” on this channel because he just saved me and my son from a 1000.00 dollar ticket. Good grief!
Thank you! I do my best to help! Here is a newer video I posted about the subject. You might find it interesting....and it's shorter :) ua-cam.com/video/4Ogeq0zRjR8/v-deo.html
You confused. The NPS website list Parks, forests, monuments, trails etc. National parks have flight restrictions, the other do not.
SirPasta117 sorry to disagree but all federal natural areas have restrictions on taking off and landing in these areas.
I think a few common sense restrictions are OK. Places like campgrounds or very crowded areas, Old Faithful in Yellowstone for example. But a out and out band is nonsense. Out here in the west the Federal Government is seizing and controlling more and more land, with more and more restrictions on usage.
Agreed! Thanks for commenting!
This has really gotten out of hand. No victim = no crime. Everything else is simply a revenue generator for the state.
The saddest thing about the history of self reporting safety incidents or mistakes is that this still leads to punishment due to the need to discourage the behaviour..... However, as an enthusiast and a hobbiest I disagree entirely with this mode of thought, get off the couch, get away from the tv, put on some fpv goggles and go for your fpv flight - albeit an expensive one, you can only live once, go live it and be free
I agree with the parks on this one. Some of the more crowded spaces you'd have everyone with their drones in the air at one time. That would ruin the views and the sounds of nature. Just go and enjoy the views with your eyes and not through the camera on your drone. Even as a drone owner I would hate standing there looking at a view and hear a drone go flying by.
Thanks for commenting!!
I fly quads to an I totally agree
I feel the same way about radios, motorhomes and motorcycles. Outlaw 'em I say because my feelings trump all others rights.
Agreed.
I've been flying for almost a year and have NEVER seen another drone while I was flying. It is a massively overstated potential "problem".
Certainly fringes on our ability to have free speech. I can go in and with megaphones blaring to all the campers about our political views, but try to preserve images of beauty and serenity gets you shut down and a fine. I do understand that there are some conservation areas, but to close down the entire park, even the public laden areas.... too much governmental interference.
Just a couple of pennies of thought.....
Bart Craytor great input! Thanks so much for chiming in!
Bart Craytor it's easier in the US to purchase a gun at a pawn shop and then wreak havoc on the public than it is to find a place to fly your drone without hassle
nospam1950 truth hurts. If it's false information then explain why it keeps happening? Yet drones terrifying communities aren't making headlines. I'm making the statement that it's ridiculous the amount of strict regulations there are for flying a drone, in contrast with the unbelievably lax rules for firearms. You're living proof that logic is not a characteristic possessed by all people.
Pay attention to my argument. I said it's easier to buy a gun at a pawn shop than to find a place to fly your drone without hassle. In my state of Texas, which has very lenient gun laws, I can be in and out of a store with a handgun. I, being a person with no prior felonies, and more than 18 years of age, can purchase a gun with no waiting period. It's that easy. I, also living in Texas, reside close to parks which do not allow drones, airport airspaces which also do not allow drones, and a neighborhood with an HOA that does not allow drones. So pay attention to what I said, it's easier to buy a gun at a pawn shop, which I can do with no hassle, than to find a place to fly my drone, which is more difficult. You have misunderstood what I've said by thinking that I said it's easier to carry around a gun, which it is not easy to do legally as you still need classes, the qualifications, and a CHL in the state of Texas. Don't worry, no one is here to take your guns, you don't have to freak out Cletus.
nospam1950 I'm sure you've seen the news...tragic. Still waiting on that deadly drone footage from the national park though.
national parks are some of the best places to fly and flying drones is one of the lowest impact activities ranked just before reading a book under a tree that one can do.
I’m a relative newbie to droning...and even I new you couldn’t fly in National Parks. Key words, National Parks, Ignorance of the law is never an excuse. By the way, this policy is currently under review, and is NOT expected to be permanent. But it only takes one A-hole drone pilot that harasses the wildlife, or ruins the quiet solitude of a NP, to ruin it for the rest of us. Be considerate of others.
I think with the proper rules of not harassing wildlife and keeping a set distance from people, they should be allowed at least on a permit bases (additional revenue) to part 107 holders. If you have gone through the license procedure you have demonstrated that you can and will (at the risk of loosing that license) fly safely and with common sense. As far a noise goes. If you are more than 200 feet from a person either horizontal or vertically, they are not going to hear the drone in the wide opes spaces. Compare that to the noise put out by helicopter tours over some National Parks.
Question.. What has been your experience in AR and MO as far as flying in State parks and Conservation areas? I have not seen signage either at the parks or online. Is it a ask permission or beg forgiveness thing with the parks?
As far as flying in a State Park or conservation area, I haven't actually done so that I am aware of, so I can't really say. If I ended up there on a whim, I would look for any signage stating the rules. If I didn't see anything I would probably fly, if I was in class G airspace. If I knew ahead of time, I would probably call the Park office and try to find out if they have any rules or guidelines concerning drone use.
i wonder if hunting and fishing are considered harassing wildlife?? If you can hunt or fish in any park, you should be able to fly your drone. Actually how about you should be able to fly a drone anywhere you are allowed to carry a gun!
Another idiot who thinks enthusiasts who spend thousands of dollars
On a Multi-rotor of any model... are interested in buzzing deer or wildlife
We spend money on or build our own MULTI-ROTORS...
To develop skills and engineer technology... not chase wildlife
Pics or it didn't happen
Exactly :)
Dude, they have these things called search warrants whereby the govt may be able to gain access to your computer and/or other media devices if they have probable cause to believe evidence of a crime may be found... maybe you should reconsider this video. Defense attorney here.
Hi. New flyer here. The NPS web site lists battlefields, trails and monuments by state which are NOT National Parks. Do you know if drone flights are banned in these areas as well?
Here is a video about a couple of documents that might help you!! ua-cam.com/video/4Ogeq0zRjR8/v-deo.html
Yep. They pretty much ban anything - look at airmap.com, it will show you what locations are a no-no.
If you can take your camera being it camera phone or SLR camera you should let people fly their droves there.
We have too much busy-body government in this country. I'm all for legislation to correct this.
Your iphone or camera can't fly to disturb people and wildlife. Parks are for people to enjoy and relax. They also can't fall out of the sky from pilot error/mechanical malfunction - land on a human or animal and injure or kill. Also, a crashed drone can potentially cause a forest fire....do I need to go on? Jeez. These things I mentioned are a few of the reasons parks are NFZ.
Many National and State parks through out the U.S. has poaching issue. Drones can easily be used by poachers to located any animal or plant they seek to unlawfully harvest for profit much faster then usual. The only way to possibly deter some poachers form this method is to just ban drones from the area altogether. Also some parks issue permits mainly to third parties that fly for research studies, inspections of it wild inhabitants, along with assisting in search and rescue operations.
Anything you want to do - it’s probably illegal.
martin savage apart from owning a gun
It is illegal to fly a drone in a National Park because the government doesn't want to be video recorded while they abduct innocent hikers and vacationers in the parks, which they've been doing for about 100 years now. National Parks are extremely dangerous places and should probably be avoided anyway. Check out David Paulides videos and, or Rusty West's YT channel for more info.
LOL.
Correct me if I am wrong....but you seem to be under the misapprehension that you will only be prosecuted if you show the video on UA-cam, the law is "not fly a drone in a National Park", the video evidence is handy, but so is a video of you admitting that you flew your drone in a National Park. In this video you have admitted to breaking the law, why would you do that?????
You know how UA-camrs are....always making up stuff for the views! lol
Well they can't effectively prosecute him if they don't know which park it was, and he went out of his way to not say that. There's also not a time or date. That would be very difficult indeed to prosecute.
Really? What national park did he admit to flying in? Nothing he said could be used as evidence.
Whoa, Whoa, Whoa... I didn't know I was subscribing to a criminal. You rebel.
Yeah.....it happens to the best of us!!!! lol
I don’t have any problem with NO FLYING of drones, etc IN National Parks. It’s nice to know SOME places are still left undisturbed and left alone AS A CONSTANT practice.
more governmet control is all it is
Felt compelled to go on the NPS website and look up Florida. To my delight, my local parks are not National Parks.
Also, what caught my curiosity is that Fort DeSoto, while listed on the NPS website, is not listed as a national park. It is a National Memorial, could this be a loophole of sorts? There are other subcategories such as National Seashore, National Monument and national Preserve, aside from those listed as national parks.
Remember if you're going to fly don't register your drone in case you lose it.
In my home town there are no posted signs in any parks or on the city web site telling you that you can not fly. It is illegal to fly in any city park. Ticket trap!
You would still want to check the airspace to make sure that isn't an issue.
National Park airspace is prohibited. You need a waiver from the FAA which you will not get for National Parks.
The NPS does not control airspace. Only the FAA does. Just as only the FCC controls communications.
I think a 9 minute flight time selfie drone shouldn't be regulated like a 27 minute 10+ mile range drone capable of carrying professional grade film equipment.
What makes the difference? Some of the smaller selfie drones are very loud and the safety isn't as reliable on them. I have heard of a lot more battery failures and crashes with the smaller drones. The Mavic Pro, Phantom, and the likes are much more reliable and safe.
Jay Malone the difference is range and flight time. A crash at your feet getting a selfie or a burst of shots in a 360 while in a 10 meter radius of the user does not have the same potential to disturb wildlife or cause property damage, especially from a sub-250 gram unit.
In my opinion National Parks are public and funded by our tax dollars so I think drones should not be restricted with a caveat of allowing experienced pilots. I fly drones and when I was first learning I was not in complete control so I ended up finding places to practice away from people. Once I had more experience, I flew in places with people but had the experience to fly with a safe distance from people. I think what is missing is some sort of certification to test a pilots ability to control the aircraft and let those certified fly in National Parks.
I hope that you have some of your help
The laws governing National Parks are no different than any other Federal laws of audio, visual, or other method of recording, any and all federal government installations without express permission. Call it paranoia or just safety of such places, where information that can be used in preparation of violent acts and terrorism against them.
I wouldn't say don't trust wikipedia. I would say don't use it as your only source. You could just google National parks in Colorado. It would probably show up.
I agree with the ban in general. People go to the parks for peace and quiet. They want to view nature and not disturb the wildlife. On the other hand, I do think that if a permit were available, that would be an excellent balance. The permit could restrict the flight plans to fit the specific needs of a park and the visitors. For instance, flying high enough such that the drone can barely be heard from the ground. Or flying over certain areas designated for drones. Each park could customize their permit to best match the needs of everyone, including drone operators.
Yeah I totally think a permit based system would be the way to go. It could limit who and how many pilots were able to fly in any given park at one time.
I do not think all National Parks should be banned from flying do to the wide open spaces they have, with the possibility of hurting someone or thing would be zero.
I assume that they have some form of reasons...I've just never seen them!
Actually, by Federal Law, (FAA regulations, not NPS), you are allowed to fly a drone in a National Park, as long as you follow CFR Part 107 federal regulations. The restriction on flights in NPs is that you CANNOT TAKEOFF or LAND a Drone within a NP. In other words, you have to launch your drone outside of the NP boundary and land outside the NP boundary.
Yes this is correct. By the way, the NPS will discourage this idea, but it is still correct.
Your national park policy is ridiculous. In Britain the national parks welcome drones to advertise them.
Yes Dave, I think it should be allowed.
your not allowed to fly drones in national parks in britain without permission
Seems like there are less and less places we can fly. I feel bad about spending close to 2K on a drone.
There are several places that are restricted.....but also several good places to fly!!!! :)
The nation parks are missing a huge promotional opportunity for their parks. More drone users would visit and that would mean more revenue for rhe park. A pictue is worth a thousand words a real life experiance is priceless.
No drones in the park is a stupid rule. The rule should be that you can't harrass the animals. But it should be okay to get reasonably close.
As a new drone owner I enjoy flying my drone. I don’t think they should be allowed everywhere, but I think the same way about dogs. I don’t think dogs belong in restaurants for example, but we are talking about drones. Most NPs are natural and full of wildlife and other people. They are there for the natural environment and beauty of the park. So I think it should be left with as few unnatural and distracting things as possible. The way I look at these situation is, sure it’s ok if one or two or ten people are in the park flying drones but what if half of all people there were doing it. It probably not be fun for either party. Like what if half of people brought their dog to eat with them, it would be chaos and somebody would probably get bit. You can apply this rational to almost anything. Just think to yourself what if everybody was doing something you don’t like instead of just a couple. Of all places on Earth I am sure you can find a nice place to fly your drone where it doesn’t bother anyone.
I understand that. This is why I am a fan of the idea of applying for a permit online. Only so many permits will be issued for the day. Everyone that has a permit, must be registered with the FAA and have all of their contact information in the NPS permit database. I don't see why that wouldn't work!
I'd hate to see more government regulations such as, only drones flying above 200' are allowed in National Parks. Ridicules right? Besides they probably disturb natural wildlife, especially birds. Last I checked, National Parks are meant to be enjoyed by all with minimal impact.
Plenty of good sense here. Remember the rules are to protect sensitive environments from intrusions that spoil it for others.
If you launch and land outside the boundary of the National Park, it's LEGAL, even if you fly within the boundaries of the park.
Yes, I have a newer video talking about that as well as some other interesting things! ua-cam.com/video/4Ogeq0zRjR8/v-deo.html
You can upload your footage as long as you are foreign tourist and you wait until you are back home to upload it; plus you make sure that you don't actually get caught with it in the park. I very much doubt they will chase after you if you are from another country; especially if they are no signage saying that its prohibited. Jay should send his footage to someone abroad that he knows then they can upload without mentioning his name.
I'm a big fan of prohibiting drones on and above units of land administered by the National Park Service.
Now the Wikipedia was not incorrect as there are only 59 units of land classified as "National Parks." However, the National Park Service administers about 417 units of land, of which National Parks are only one type of designation. The National Park Service also administers National Monuments, National Recreation Areas (the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also administer some of these), National Seashores, National Lakeshores, National Rivers, National Battlefields, Parkways (Blue Ridge and Natchez Trace come to mind) and some others I haven't mentioned. All four of these federal land management agencies also have wilderness areas designated by Congress. Federal law prohibits the use of aircraft (landing and takeoff) and the use and possession of mechanized equipment in wilderness areas, including bicycles, carts, wagons, drones, helicopters and similar.
Drone operators are expected to know what they are doing and to have nearly as much knowledge of where they are flying as an aircraft pilot who see these laws listed on their sectional charts. Also, don't even think about operating a drone anywhere near a wildland fire. Please look this subject up to find out how drones have caused some near misses and have caused the entire aviation operation of fires, both big and small, to be shut down, putting lives and property in jeopardy. If you see smoke from a wildland fire keep that drone on the ground!!
Yes, I have a video covering some of those other locations! ua-cam.com/video/4Ogeq0zRjR8/v-deo.html
The state and national parks belong to we the people. I fly all over Rainier National Park and will continue to do so. We have the ability to share the beauty of wilderness areas with people that don’t have the ability to visit these places. These parks belong to every citizen. Don’t ever let bureaucrats keep you from life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I had the same thing, but with a handheld camera closed trail area, but refused to talk to the ranger, He showed up at my house 3 times during a weekend. I pleaded innocent at pretrial, and asked for pretrial discovery, a month later called the prosecuter and agreed on no contest and $350 vs $1000. No lawyer needed, I think i could haev gone down to 250 or 300 but I was tired of it all.
Oh wow!
That's why I'm planning on getting waivers to fly a drone without being in line of sight. 107.31 I believe is what its called.
Your fine. Mens Rea (sp?)is a legal defense. A judge told me ignorance of the law means no intent which is a necessary element of a crime.
Sir, this is the National park Service and we need you to mail your drones to us at once.
Sure...what address?
Hi, I’m a foreign and I’d like to if this rule is valid for all kind of drones. If we use a self drone bellow 0.55 pounds is it allowed?
The rules that I have mentioned are for the US and the FAA. You would need to check with the organization that governs your Civil Aviation in your country.
There should be some rules to stop idiots from recklessly taking over the air of national parks but at the same time these parks are the PEOPLES parks. It’s crazy how an entity that supposed to work for us is constantly telling us what we can’t do and is always trying to fine us or incarcerate us for doing it. I would understand at a place that is prone to wildfires and things like that but for the most part there is no real danger involved.
Yes, I believe that an online application to obtain a day permit would work. Limit the number of permits given for the day. Require all contact information and drone registration numbers. This would limit the park from being overrun with drones, but yet allow the beauty to be captured!
Wikipedia is probably the worst site for getting accurate info
True....lesson learned! :)
This is why you never use your real identity on the internet.
I challenge the administration to justify any restriction of recreational drone photography over publicly held park lands. Restrictions concerning safety and privacy in bathing campgrounds, military or commercial development are reasonable. However, public lands are public and should be free for safe recreational ecologically friendly use .
As much as I agree....the NPS has restricted it and I will do my best to abide by the law until it is changed!
Bad law, left unchallenged, remains bad law. Well considered regulation is the result of litigation, and legislation. Arbitrary emergency rule usually has sunset clause by which time well considered legislation and policy can be tried and tested. Best wishes, and please push the envelope.
The FAA has a clunky app for drone pilots called B4Ufly. It's designed to plan your next adventure. However it's really hard to save pinned locations. I does list all national parks, TFR's and other restricted areas. Almost everywhere has some kind of restriction or warning. Especially because of airports and military bases. But the app does say I can fly inside (most of) all 17 national monuments in my region. For example: I pinned an area of White Sands NM. Ok to fly according to the app. But the park website says drones prohibited because of the adjacent military base. Probably best to avoid that place no matter where. Common sense.
You are very true about the clunky app. The FAA should step up their game if they want pilots following all the rules! The confusing part is that the NPS makes the rules about the parks and monuments. Some of the monuments are allowed to fly in the area, but the NPS rules are you cannot take off or land on NPS land.
The NPS oversees several areas that are not listed as "National Parks:" National Monuments, National Memorials, National Historic Sites, National Historic Trails, , National Recreation Areas, National Historic Parks, etc. For example, the NPS website lists 24 areas ran by NPS in AZ but only 3 are technically "National Parks." Could the "park" you flew over be one of these? Does the rule include these other areas?
You have a great comment and I have created a video about that! ua-cam.com/video/4Ogeq0zRjR8/v-deo.html
Thanks! I'm thinking about taking the Part 107 test soon.
You're welcome. I passed my test on the first try, but I did go through some online training first....I'm very glad that I did!
We are just talking about National Parks here and seem to be assuming that State Parks are okay, I suggest you enter your State Parks' website and check before you fly. Florida State parks do not permit personal drone flying, However, and I haven't confirmed this yet, if you are part 107 you can fly after asking for permission and I believe is under the discretion of the Ranger, not sure if you need to buy a permit, soon to find out.
Yes, it is good to check with your local state and city parks before flying!
I am all paranoid now. I kind of regret buying a drone. Not worth the hassle. I too found myself removing a video because I was unknowingly flying in restricted area. I thought the app would alert you of those areas by that did not happen.
There are some restrictions that are a little too much....but don't regret buying it! It can be a lot of fun!
wow you have rocketed in less than a year, gained 11000 subscribers, thats awesome man, only just hit 1000 and no change yet in growing since hitting in the other week
Thanks man! Yeah, this past year has been good for subscriber growth.....just not all of them are active viewers! I could use more of those! lol :)
Jay Malone ha same, I feel only 50-100 of my 1000 are active for me, I wish I got more comments and interaction
Yes, I found it hard to accept that people don't watch all of my videos. But I understand that we always don't have time, or just not always interested in that particular video. I have a handful of channels that I watch all of their videos. For instance, I don't miss a Casey Neistat or Peter McKinnon video! lol But we just have to accept that we will NEVER get everyone watching!
It should be illegal to buy a drone without a part 107. Just like it’s illegal to fly a plane without a license.
So, people are expected to pay a tax (yes, that is what it is) to the federal/national government to "register" a drone, but then cannot fly that drone in a national park? Seems legit.
Yeah, you are pretty much correct!!