Drones banned from Yosemite National Park

[Ervin Farkas]

Yosemite National Park issued a warning Friday, and it didn't have to do with bears or hazardous park conditions. The new concern: Unmanned drone aircraft. There are numerous videos on YouTube in which drones are used to take in the scenic beauty. Rangers said enough is enough.

"The park has experienced an increase in visitors using drones within park boundaries over the last few years," officials said in a statement. "Drones have been witnessed filming climbers ascending climbing routes, filming views above tree-tops, and filming aerial footage of the park." The park said drones pose a safety threat as well as ruin the aesthetics of the wilderness. "Drones can be extremely noisy, and can impact the natural soundscape," officials said. "Drones can also impact the wilderness experience for other visitors, creating an environment that is not conducive to wilderness travel."

The park said the use of drones there is illegal, but it's unclear if anyone has been caught in the act.

Source: Illegal drones ruining Yosemite's natural beauty, rangers say - latimes.com

[Bruce Watson]

Originally Posted by Ervin Farkas

Rangers said enough is enough.

I'll second that.

[Tim Polster]

I don't have a dog in the fight, but would say I agree with the Park's stance.

[Vince Pachiano]

Just curious if they quantified the safety threat, as compared to say climbing, or vehicle accidents

[Mark Williams]

Although I want one, they are very annoying to listen to. Especially if you go to a park to get away from sound pollution.

[Les Wilson]

Originally Posted by Vince Pachiano

Just curious if they quantified the safety threat, as compared to say climbing, or vehicle accidents

What does it matter? It adds to whatever is already present so when is enough enough? Safety is one of several negatives and not the main one.

[Finn Yarbrough]

I must say, while I operate a small R/C and would like to be able to do so wherever I want... what gives me the right? I do think the default should be to respect the rights of the wider public and the natural realm.

[Dave Allen]

Like the FAA had no authority to ban commercial multirotor imaging as found by the appellate courts, the park service rangers have no jurisdiction to regulate the airways, this is FAA jurisdiction.

Mission creep.

[Mark Williams]

The NPS does have the authority to regulate how the property they manage is used. The court ruling you mentioned has nothing to do with administration of federal park lands. Park agencies (NPS, COE, BLM, USFS) have long had the authority to regulate particular uses of the resource through CFR 36. The FAA even has long-standing flight rules over some parks that considers safety and quiet.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx...6/36tab_02.tpl

http://www.nps.gov/grca/parkmgmt/upl..._through_C.pdf

http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/...t-93/subpart-U

http://www2.mvn.usace.army.mil/recre...rulesnregs.asp

[Peter Mykusz]

The ranger at the Grand Canyon National Park information desk said that you would need special permission to fly a drone there. Irresponsible people have used drones to chase the giant condors in the air.
It may be possible to fly in private areas like the Grand Canyon West, home of the Hualapai Indian Nation, where helicopter tours are available.
The Grand Canyon is an amazing sight!

[Chuck Spaulding]

Originally Posted by Ervin Farkas

Yosemite National Park issued a warning Friday, and it didn't have to do with bears or hazardous park conditions. The new concern: Unmanned drone aircraft. There are numerous videos on YouTube in which drones are used to take in the scenic beauty. Rangers said enough is enough.

"The park has experienced an increase in visitors using drones within park boundaries over the last few years," officials said in a statement. "Drones have been witnessed filming climbers ascending climbing routes, filming views above tree-tops, and filming aerial footage of the park." The park said drones pose a safety threat as well as ruin the aesthetics of the wilderness. "Drones can be extremely noisy, and can impact the natural soundscape," officials said. "Drones can also impact the wilderness experience for other visitors, creating an environment that is not conducive to wilderness travel."

The park said the use of drones there is illegal, but it's unclear if anyone has been caught in the act.

Source: Illegal drones ruining Yosemite's natural beauty, rangers say - latimes.com

What a load of CRAP!

Here's a great example of a wonderful video that if bureaucrats had their way would never have been made:

EROSION on Vimeo

They ban MR's because of an increase of videos on YouTube. You can free climb Half Dome, base jump, balance on ropes suspended hundreds of feet in the air, they have a field where hang gliders can land, thousands of cars drive through every day and they think drones are ruining Yosemite's natural beauty. What total BS.

As long as "they" get to use the park the way "they" think it should be enjoyed, "they" will decide how to restrict access to to everyone else.

The hypocrisy is palpable.

[Charles W. Hull]

Originally Posted by Chuck Spaulding

What a load of CRAP!

As long as "they" get to use the park the way "they" think it should be enjoyed, "they" will decide how to restrict access to to everyone else.

I agree.

I don't have a problem with regulating drones. But a ban is nonsense; it kills the use of a fantastic new photo and video tool in the Park. I'm appalled at how many photographers and videographers nod their heads and agree with the ban. I must be getting old, but I think many people give up their rights too easily.

Here is what I would do about drones.
1. License drone operators; they would pass a test on the regulations and how to operate a drone safely, and they would demonstrate they can fly safely and responsibly.
2. Limit the size of drones operated in the Park. Possibly limit the db.
3. A permit would be required to fly in the Park. This could limit the days and hours of operation.

This would control drone nuisance, but it would allow this new photo and video tool do develop responsibly, and let us experience the Park in this new and astonishing way.

[Chuck Spaulding]

Unfortunately I don't think most people see this as an infringement of their civil liberties. When we regulate things under the guise of safety or security that seems to make it OK. Its not. We spent billions of dollars making everyone remove their shoes and scanning them because some insane psychopath was going to blow up a plane. Talk about catering to the lowest common denominator of society.

I'm reluctant to make it necessary that you have a permit to shoot in the park. It puts bureaucrats in the position of picking winners and loser's, some will be able to shoot there and other will have to wait like 15 years.

But this is how ridiculous this is, this guy is a guest speaker who is being recognized for his contributions to aerial video. Congratulations, I wish I had the opportunity to do AP the way he does. They closed Yosemite to drones so I can’t shoot there but he can shoot in State and National Parks? Why? He works for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Talk about hypocrisy. While the rest of us were being restricted from flying commercial AP this government employee was being paid to shoot AP.

Sacramento Video Industry Professional's, The Sacramento VIP's

[Paul R Johnson]

Did you ever see the judge Judy episode where an rc aircraft landed in some bodies garden and they refused to return it, having warned the local club that they considered unauthorised entry to their property as trespass. She ruled that they had the right to not be disturbed by the aircraft, that the potential damage should they come down was high. She said they couldn't keep the wreckage, but said they were entitled to damages.

If the park is owned by somebody, I'm assuming they can set whatever rules they want, and that noise is very very annoying!

[Jim Michael]

I think the ban is about the noise ordinance. You can't use motorized toys in the park.