Drone Dilemma: Balancing State And Federal Air Space Regulations

Maybe you're among the growing number of people who received a drone for Christmas. If so, you're not alone. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) estimates that 2.3 million consumer drones were sold this year. By 2021, that figure is projected to reach nearly 30 million.

As more and more unmanned aerial vehicles hit the skies—many of them equipped with cameras—questions arise as well. And balancing the freedom of hobbyists to fly with privacy issues is increasingly stressing local and federal agencies.

Back in early December, President Donald Trump signed a bill reinstating the FAA's drone registration requirement. It laid out specific rules for consumer drones. At the same time, North Carolina lawmakers passed their own set of regulations—like one loosening restrictions on drone use in emergency management, and another limiting flight distance near prisons.

WFDD's David Ford recently spoke to Chad Budreau with the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA). Since 1936, the organization has been working with federal, state and local governing bodies to keep airspace safe. Budreau says the state and federal mandates are oftentimes at odds.

Interview Highlights

On state versus federal drone legislation:

This is such a complicated issue in the fact that states like North Carolina do have a responsibility to protect people and property on the ground. In the same vein the FAA is declaring ultimate authority in the airspace. So, there has been a lot of confusion over where exactly is that line, and what is the role and responsibility of states like North Carolina. Sometimes, perhaps they go too far on one end or the other. So, right now, the law of the land is anything above a blade of grass is FAA jurisdiction. That typically has been upheld, and local does not have jurisdiction and cannot interfere or contradict federal rules. But that doesn't mean it won't change. This is an ongoing conversation.

On North Carolina's specific drone rules emphasizing surveillance:

I believe legislators are well-intended. I do believe they're trying to solve a perceived problem—perhaps from a concerned citizen or a news story that invoked some concern, but often existing tort laws apply. It shouldn't matter if you're invading privacy regardless of the device or tools used—binoculars, or a drone—an invasion of privacy is an invasion of privacy. Local law enforcement are empowered to act on that, and the FAA has clarified that. Their chief council has clarified that in writing and in guidance to state and local. So, perhaps local laws may need to be tweaked or refined, but I think it becomes a slippery slope once you start targeting specific technologies or specific devices, because it could create loopholes, and it also burdens legislators to continually amend laws depending on whatever the latest and greatest innovation is.

North Carolina House Bill 1099 prohibits animal rights organizations from using drones to survey hunters among other regulations, and some groups have used drones to film agricultural industries like large livestock farms also known as concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). How does this state law square with FAA regulations?

That's where it does get a little tricky. Flying a drone over a CAFO, that's where the FAA may say, ‘A drone is permitted to do that.' Once it leaves the ground, it could fly over anywhere in the national air space as long as it's complying with federal regulations. So, that is where it gets awfully grey. When it comes down to 'Can a drone harass a hunter who has a hunting license and is doing everything legally?' By all means, a drone cannot harass someone or harass a business or a CAFO. But simply flying over a farm it becomes grey, because if there is a clear violation of privacy…then yes, the state has a right to take enforcement action or to deter or stop that action. But simply flying over a farm or a CAFO? That's a different story.