New drone rules ‘criminalise’ model citizens
AS A young boy in the 1960s I spent many hours down at the local park or schoolyard, flying my carefully hand-built model aircraft.
It was such a buzz to see them take to the air – even if they usually did crash just moments later.
In my entire 55 years of flying model aircraft, I have never once injured anyone nor damaged anyone else’s property. Most of the time that I was flying the only rule was ‘‘use common sense’’ – and obviously this has worked pretty well for me and the thousands of other Kiwis that have enjoyed this innocent pastime.
So it was with great sadness that I read through the CAA’s new regulations for the operation of radio-controlled flying models and drones – now collectively called ‘‘remotely-piloted aircraft’’.
How tragic it is that in one fell swoop of the regulator’s pen, those who fly these craft for pleasure and relaxation have effectively been stripped of the rights they’ve enjoyed for so long – despite the fact that this hobby has an outstanding safety record?
No longer can a father and his young boy just walk down to the local schoolyard or park to fly over a long series of winter evenings. Although these craft may weigh just a few tens of grams, the new regulations consider them to be every bit as menacing, risky and dangerous as the much larger professional drones used by commercial operators.
If you or your children fly these tiny toys anywhere, without first obtaining the permission of the property owner over which they will briefly soar, then a $5000 fine is in the offing.
What’s more, even if the local council sets aside a small park or reserve in which you have permission to fly, you must also seek the permission of anyone else who is using that area or who enters that area – lest you face another possible $5000 fine.
Why are we treating children and responsible adults like enemies of the state, threatening them with huge fines for doing nothing more than what they’ve been doing for decades, in complete safety and in harmony with the world around them? The ironies are abundant. If I have a full-sized aircraft, I can fly it across almost any piece of land in New Zealand with impunity. However, if my child flies his 20g toy over the same land without gaining the expressed prior permission of the landowner, he has committed an offence under CAA’s new regulations.
CAA tell us that these new regulations are risk-based and that the more risky the operation, the tougher the regulations and penalties. So please explain to me how it is somehow less risky for a commercial operator to fly their very large, very heavy, potentially lethal drone over my head without my permission – than it is for a child to do the same with their feather-weight toy?
In most countries around the world it is legal to fly recreational drones in public places – so long as you adhere to a few commonsense rules. Sadly for us, it is now illegal for anyone to fly a drone in a public place without prior consent.
In the case of most of New Zealand’s landscape, obtaining that consent will likely be nigh on impossible for someone who’s only in the country for a few weeks.
Already I have heard from tourists who have said they will be striking this country from their list of preferred destinations.
All I can deduce from this is that we have yet another case where the rights of New Zealanders are being erased and replaced by ‘‘privileges’’ that must be purchased from the appropriate government agency.