Public Shaming Drone Flying POS

[Straight Arrow]

... it just seems like a “mind your own business” kind of thing to me.

Yep, but on the flip side that's why I am tempted to shoot that intrusive drone overhead on the trail I'm hiking ... just minding my own business.

 

[buckbull]

So there’s the rules that say you can’t, therefore you can’t…but putting that aside, what is the actual harm of people flying drones in a wilderness area?

I’m thinking as a hypothetical situation where the pilot didn’t lose or leave their drone, merely flew it around then left and the only offense was flying the drone.

It doesn’t really matter, as we’re not the policy creators, but it just seems like a “mind your own business” kind of thing to me.

Drone would be one of the last things I'd want to encounter in a wilderness area. The draw of a wilderness area is the lack of un-wilderness things.

 

[Sytes]

Drone would be one of the last things I'd want to encounter in a wilderness area. The draw of a wilderness area is the lack of un-wilderness things.

I'd love to hear that said to USFS for bridges, meat poles... and outfitters for mass pack trains through meadows and camp setups...

Where would we like a lack of "un-wilderness" things to be, a lack of un-wilderness things? Some dufus with his g/f flying a drone or the real wilderness erosion machines?

Not knocking you. I feel somewhat the same. IMO, Wilderness should be untrammeled by man - ie... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. No trails, bridges, buildings, etc. However, Outfitters would crap a log.

 

[wytex]

I'd love to hear that said to USFS for bridges, meat poles... and outfitters for mass pack trains through meadows and camp setups...

Where would we like a lack of "un-wilderness" things to be, a lack of un-wilderness things? Some dufus with his g/f flying a drone or the real wilderness erosion machines?

Not knocking you. I feel somewhat the same. IMO, Wilderness should be untrammeled by man - ie... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. No trails, bridges, buildings, etc. However, Outfitters would crap a log.

And NO DRONES.

 

[Straight Arrow]

We don't need no stinkin' drones or ebikes in the Bob! It's bad enough that the noisy clip clop of hooves over the stock bridge on North Fork of the Sun drives Sytes and me nutso!

 

[Moserkr]

We don't need no stinkin' drones or ebikes in the Bob! It's bad enough that the noisy clip clop of hooves over the stock bridge on North Fork of the Sun drives Sytes and me nutso!

Cant say I like seeing herds of moo cows and their massive salt lick piles either. Some areas looked as bad as a feed lot.

 

[Bonasababy]

I see now that the guy was in the wrong since he was in the wilderness when he took off and landed his drone and for that I appreciate the OP calling him out.

But as to address your point, wilderness areas do not have airspace that extend above them that is part of the wilderness, so if you take off and land outside the boundaries of the wilderness then technically you aren't breaking any laws, and you haven't flown "into" the wilderness unless you land inside of it.

Not what I am familiar with, although my experience is low level flying, have to get approval for it.

 

[Deez Nutz]

Not what I am familiar with, although my experience is low level flying, have to get approval for it.

The FAA requests that you do not fly closer than 2000 ft agl in wilderness areas among other places (WMA's, parks, etc.) unless necessary for takeoff or landing but it is not a law, just a request. Not that its not decent and prudent to abide by the request, but the above comments were in regard to breaking actual laws.

I've just kind of been playing devils advocate for the guy but at this point I think its been established that he wasn't exactly following the rules anyway so I'm just gonna let it rest.

 

[buckbull]

I'd love to hear that said to USFS for bridges, meat poles... and outfitters for mass pack trains through meadows and camp setups...

Where would we like a lack of "un-wilderness" things to be, a lack of un-wilderness things? Some dufus with his g/f flying a drone or the real wilderness erosion machines?

Not knocking you. I feel somewhat the same. IMO, Wilderness should be untrammeled by man - ie... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. No trails, bridges, buildings, etc. However, Outfitters would crap a log.

Ban that s*%< too!

 

[406dn]

I'd love to hear that said to USFS for bridges, meat poles... and outfitters for mass pack trains through meadows and camp setups...

Where would we like a lack of "un-wilderness" things to be, a lack of un-wilderness things? Some dufus with his g/f flying a drone or the real wilderness erosion machines?

Not knocking you. I feel somewhat the same. IMO, Wilderness should be untrammeled by man - ie... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. No trails, bridges, buildings, etc. However, Outfitters would crap a log.

That's a nice thought, but the wilderness act would never stand, with those rules. It is tough enough now to get a wilderness designation. If there was no realistic access, I can hear the politicians proclaiming the tyranny of the elites.

 

[FairWeather]

I'd love to hear that said to USFS for bridges, meat poles... and outfitters for mass pack trains through meadows and camp setups...

Where would we like a lack of "un-wilderness" things to be, a lack of un-wilderness things? Some dufus with his g/f flying a drone or the real wilderness erosion machines?

Not knocking you. I feel somewhat the same. IMO, Wilderness should be untrammeled by man - ie... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. No trails, bridges, buildings, etc. However, Outfitters would crap a log.

Why stop there? Might as well go to absolutely no humans.

A drone that touches nothing is doing less harm to the habitat than a hiker’s footsteps. Certainly less than a hunter who’s going off the trails, trampling through the underbrush. If a drone that touches nothing is still too much contact and ruining the wilderness, why do we let anyone in at all?

 

[more_cowbell]

One way to dissuade people like that is to look them in the eye and tell them they have a "real purdy mouth".

Also have to ask: was there a Subaru Crosstrek parked at the trailhead? Rocking a manbun? Combine those with the tats, should eventually get him identified.

Joking aside, any chance this guy is an influencer, shooting for his 200+ followers?

Influencers Ruining Stuff

If you’ve ever fished this place, it’s pretty special and not that well known. Always great to see an out of state influencer blowing up spots like this for content for their social media pages.

www.hunttalk.com

 

[Sytes]

That's a nice thought, but the wilderness act would never stand, with those rules. It is tough enough now to get a wilderness designation. If there was no realistic access, I can hear the politicians proclaiming the tyranny of the elites.

Come on... Haha! Of course it's a nice thought... That's all it was. We obviously know what the wilderness act is We obviously know the agencies are way overly demanding restrictions on it that even Frank Church says Congress never intended.

 

[mdhunter61]

Why stop there? Might as well go to absolutely no humans.

A drone that touches nothing is doing less harm to the habitat than a hiker’s footsteps. Certainly less than a hunter who’s going off the trails, trampling through the underbrush. If a drone that touches nothing is still too much contact and ruining the wilderness, why do we let anyone in at all?

If this guy posts his drone footage on Youtube and draws a bunch of new traffic to this area, that might be considered harm...if he makes money from the footage, even worse.

 

[FairWeather]

If this guy posts his drone footage on Youtube and draws a bunch of new traffic to this area, that might be considered harm...if he makes money from the footage, even worse.

Inconvenient, yes, but it’s no more harmful than people going there now. It’s public land, all those new people coming to it would also have a right to go there.

If it got busy enough, they’d implement a permit system to keep down the amount of visitors at any one time.

 

[Hem]

Inconvenient, yes, but it’s no more harmful than people going there now. It’s public land, all those new people coming to it would also have a right to go there.

If it got busy enough, they’d implement a permit system to keep down the amount of visitors at any one time.

I gotta say it...your reasoning is suspect.
Drone guy?

 

[COEngineer]

If someone genuinely cannot understand how obnoxious a drone is, then I can't explain it to you and your ignorance explains why it it has to be codified.

 

[Sytes]

@COEngineer
Easy there tiger! Obnoxious? I enjoy many of your posts though your last is a bit, "obnoxious". It's not really though sounds humorous to write.

They are fun as heck!

Drone guy?

I'm a, "drone guy" or more of an enthusiast. Love the quality drone I have for all it legally does.

Fantastic for creating videos. Enjoyable to operate. Cool hobby.
Example, intro and exit of:

One example.

 

[kwyeewyk]

Why stop there? Might as well go to absolutely no humans.

A drone that touches nothing is doing less harm to the habitat than a hiker’s footsteps. Certainly less than a hunter who’s going off the trails, trampling through the underbrush. If a drone that touches nothing is still too much contact and ruining the wilderness, why do we let anyone in at all?

The purpose of the wilderness act isn't necessarily to prevent harm to wilderness, it's to preserve wilderness characteristics:

"Wilderness character is a holistic concept based on the interaction of (1) biophysical environments primarily free from modern human manipulation and impact, (2) personal experiences in natural environments relatively free from the encumbrances and signs of modern society, and (3) symbolic meanings of humility, restraint, and interdependence that inspire human connection with nature."

 

[tjones]

Most guys can’t make it in a wilderness area without their inreach, cell phone and onX.

And hate the drone.