Dave Pitman

Washington DNR is a state agency rather than federal. Some of the management practice may be similar. Nothing wrong with calling for information. But, in some cases, the person on the other end of the phone doesn't know the answer and rather than sending you to someone who does, they wing it and give you their best guess which is often wrong. That's why it is best if you can research for yourself first, and then be in a position to qualify the answers you get when calling. For example. I doubt there is any restriction about filming commercially on most DNR managed lands.

I don't know if you found your answer or not. Too late now, but you were free to submit your comments in pdf format where there was no character limit. That's what I, and I suspect many others, did. Next time!

Generally, you can fly if the airspace is not controlled and there are no state or local land use ordinances against take-off and landing. Read through all the related links here: https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/ DJI has a built in geofencing feature that won't let the model fly in certain areas. Usually, controlled airspace, prisons, and various other locations. You can type in an address on their site to see if they have any restrictions in place. https://www.dji.com/flysafe/geo-map

In general, if the BLM administered land is NOT designated a Wilderness area, then it is what I referred to as "vanilla", my term. And, generally uas operation is permitted. There are also non-wilderness areas administered by both the National Park Service or BLM that are also off limits. The link you provided lists some of those. It is up to you to do your due diligence on any particualr area you wish to operate. Sometimes it's not easy. Here is a good article on the subject. Good Luck! https://fstoppers.com/aerial/making-heads-or-tails-flying-drone-over-us-public-lands-226124

I replied in the other thread. Basically, "vanilla" BLM (or National Forest) yes. "Wilderness" no.

Hi Ellie, I believe the distinction you have is your area of interest is a "Wilderness area". This is different than vanilla BLM lands. It is the same for National Forest land. UAS operation is generally allowed in these public lands, UNLESS they are designated a Wilderness area. At that point, they are treated more like National Parks, and in some cases, even more strictly. Note that like National Parks, you can fly over them, but not land or take off. Which usually means the area you would like to photograph is logistically unobtainable. https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=8a7fc4a6a7bd4c0fcf5cfd19b7de4faa&mc=true&node=pt43.2.6300&rgn=div5#sp43.2.6300.6302

Unless you are cranking out volume ortho-products, its difficult to beat MapsMadeEasy.com Small jobs process for FREE. Orthos can be shared with the public for FREE. Clients do NOT need to register to access. Maps can be embedded in websites for FREE. Larger jobs process on a pay-per project. NO subscriptions. I have no affiliation with MME. I'm looking forward to when MME has some competition in this space as it's good for all users. But so far, the difference in pricing is fairly dramatic. Traditionally, these types of products would only be used by survey professionals who have for years, and still do, pay high margins for their tools. It makes sense, I guess, because the survey shops can just pass on those costs to their customers. However, to non-survey pros, the cost of tools (including software) are somewhat daunting when only doing an occasional project for purposes that have smaller budgets.

I would use the mini to introduce the hobby to kids of all ages.

That is the same language used to prohibit use in Washington state parks, where I live. You can legally fly over the park but not operate, take off or land, from the park. Same for National parks. They don'd like you to fly over either in most cases, but it is not covered by the statute.

Yep, preaching to the choir! GCPs or a GNSS kit (just an example : https://topodrone.org/) is definitely a requirement for global accuracy. Otherwise, useful for relative accuracy stuff, like volumetrics, or general reference orthoimagery.

While most know that the location accuracy of these drones is not on a precision scale, I've not seen anyone quantify it with regard to which way the drone is heading. Actually, the position variance in your sample only diverge a couple of meters (over all) which is pretty good. It is interesting that absolutely 0% reported on the mark. You would think (hope) that occasionally it would happen to be on target. Imaging if the plot were bullet holes, the safest place to be would be on the bulls-eye, ironically. They do cluster like you mention. Knowing that, if the mechanism existed, an operator could run a similar test, and based upon the results input an offset correction in the settings and end up with largely good (or at least better) position data in the image set. For now, we'll just have to either employ one of the precision gnss/ppk solutions, or GCPs to correct for inaccuracy.

No. But they can bully you. I did not find any law (or pending bill) searching Nebraska state law. https://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/laws.php Try contacting the state attorney general's office rather that the locals. You are more likely to get actual answers to state law questions rather than knee-jerk reactions.

I don't think it even claims to. It's about building a UTM for the benefit of delivery wannabees. The next step will be to require GA to upload all their data in real time for "safety" sake. Wonder if that would get AOPA's attention?

For photos, most any cad program or Google Earth (free) could be used. Video can be done in post production editing. Davinci Resolve is free, but learning to do tracking overlays will take some time investment. And, it would just be approximate in any case.

Hi Brian, Here are some operators near you. You might reach out to them for a quote. Sounds fun, good luck! https://dronepilotscentral.com/search/?geodir_search=1&stype=gd_place&s=+&snear=Boston%2C+MA&sgeo_lat=42.3600825&sgeo_lon=-71.0588801