Recreational drone now illegal in most of Canada...

Before today it was not a rules it was just basic guidelines, it was perfectly legal to fly close to buildings, or within 9km to airports, as long as you were not a danger to the aviation.

Very poorly and non-educated drafting of new rules and regulations for recreational drone enthusiasts.

Just a knee jerk reaction by those who have no clue when it comes to operation of these units. Basing their findings on exaggerated, unsubstantiated media reports regarding the amount of "incidents' - yes incidents not accidents.

Citing....."incidents relative to flying drones recreationally have increased by 3x since 2014" ----- that is just irresponsible hog wash when you don't take into consideration the exponential growth in drone ownership and recreational flying! Obviously the incident reporting will increase with regard to the number of drones in the air! No different that increased ground traffic will without doubt increase incident and accident reporting on same.

If they did the math on how many recreational drones there were in....2014 to 2017..... Vs....... pre 2014 then calculate and compare how many "reported incidents" relative to the number of drones over those two time frames.............I would bet the ratio of number or drones Vs reported incidents is no doubt higher but likely pretty insignificant.

They are imposing this now and will again review it in June/July 2017? What is that all about? With the kind of restrictions they have employed here now - the "incident" reporting is going to increase tremendously since hobbyists are going to fly sometimes without even realizing they are "breaking the law" (I know not law yet but...). Maybe that's the whole idea behind reviewing it in 3-4 months - more incidents for them to use against us.

Not impressed by the ever increasing "nanny state laws and regulations" that are just arbitrarily thrown out there - just because "they can"! Pathetic and a total embarrassment for Canada.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jwmcgrath
It bears noting that there has been no requirement for commercial pilots to report "with certainty" what exactly it is that they thought the saw out the window, hundreds or thousands of feet away, while moving at a few hundred miles an hour.

Everyone has been free and clear to assume every object seen or reported is a drone. Accepting those conclusions without verification is contributing to these potentially erroneous statistics and newly implemented restrictions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eaglegoaltender
And until that point comes, while rules are important, they shouldn't be so stifling as to virtually eliminate their casual use, which is close to what these restrictions do.

Well said JW.........when they try using the increased "reported incidents" as justification for these changes without any real facts - then think they can fix all this with near total restrictive recreational flying. That kind of thinking and acting makes me shake my head to think these "highly educated" ministers have zero perspective on reality. Do they not realize by adding these restrictions - there will very likely be far more "incidents" reported than ever before.

Citing as part of their justification for these changes with....."incidents relative to flying drones recreationally have increased by 3x since 2014" ----- that is just irresponsible hog wash when you don't take into consideration the exponential growth in drone ownership and recreational flying over the same time period! Obviously the incident reporting will increase with regard to the number of drones in the air! No different that increased ground traffic will without doubt increase incident and accident reporting on same.

If they did the math on how many recreational drones there were in....2014 to 2017..... Vs....... pre 2014 then calculate and compare how many "reported incidents" relative to the number of drones over those two time frames.............I would bet the ratio of number of drones Vs reported incidents is no doubt slightly higher but likely pretty insignificant and not enough to justify this nonsense.

Why in hell do they do this and say they will review it all again this summer? Hmmm.....maybe they do realize these ridiculous regulations will increase the number or "incidents" and can say - "see we told you so" .............. then ban drones period - yes that is an exaggeration - however, considering what they have just done, wouldn't be surprising.

.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jwmcgrath
I read an article awhile ago that I thought was interesting, in this article it was stated that the majority of drone sightings by pilots were false. The investigations showed that what they saw were in fact not drones but birds, balloons, etc.

One report, the pilot said that he had struck a drone. The investigators took all of 20 mins of examining the aircraft to determine that it was not a drone strike. The pilot remained adamant that he had hit a drone. The investigator replied " unless the are now making drones that bleed, you sir have hit a bird".

The point if this is that there such a phobia about drones currently that things get over reported or incorrectly reported. We as a drone community must fly responsibly and not give them any ammunition for these reports. After a while the hype will die off provided we don't get legislated to death.

This morning I received an email from DJI (as most of you North American users probably did as well), letting me know about "NODE" . Everyone should join as well and make a loud voice for our concerns to be heard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jwmcgrath
Why do they do this and say they will review it all again this summer? Hmmm.....maybe they do realize these ridiculous regulations will increase the number or "incidents" and can say - "see we told you so" .............. then ban drones period - yes that is an exaggeration - however, considering what they have just done, wouldn't be surprising.

I'm firmly of the opinion that on a scale of A-Z with Z being "complete ban", they are threatening the hobby with "X" right now, assuming some sort of push back and realizing they may have to settle with Q... when in reality somewhere around M should be considered realistic.

They know after the threat of X that hobbyists will probably be satisfied accepting Q, and the government has successfully furthered their mandate.

I truly don't understand how quickly and easily these restrictions were put into place in a free and democratic society, while at the same time I have seen countless community notices, meetings, feedback opportunities and negotiations take place before an expansion of the local landfill can even be applied for.
 
I truly don't understand how quickly and easily these restrictions were put into place in a free and democratic society, while at the same time I have seen countless community notices, meetings, feedback opportunities and negotiations take place before an expansion of the local landfill can even be applied for.

Couldn't agree more - and it just goes to show you there was "zero" thought or responsible investigation done prior to writing up those changes. I have been reading where drone manufacturers were not even informed prior to these changes - common courtesy one would think should apply there since the OEM's need to report such changes to their shareholders etc. Not to mention obtaining valuable information and education regarding same.

Without a doubt the changes were very much ""knee jerk" reactions to these ridiculous claims and incident reports the media puts out there. Commercial pilots now report almost everything they see out of a cockpit window as a "drone sighting" and our Transport Minister just sucks it all in and treats it as "the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth"!

What is truly ridiculous IMO, is they missed what one would think would be the most obvious change that should have been done - and that was - "registration" of all drones as was done in the US.

This morning I received an email from DJI (as most of you North American users probably did as well), letting me know about "NODE" . Everyone should join as well and make a loud voice for our concerns to be heard.

Yup got it - and my first thought was ---- what a sad and embarrassing way for DJI to actually recognize Canada as one of the countries where their product is sold.

You are correct - everyone, not just Canadians should be signing up for "NODE" - if these regulations in Canada become law - it will have a ripple effect all over NA and elsewhere.
 
I just reread the press release. Incredulous... it's as though he miraculously identified and thwarted and deadly pending threat, by "using his authority to enact interim measures" prior to June.

Can't sleep at night as our Transport Minister? With all due respect, I think his role is to protect the transportation infrastructure WHILE maintaining the best interests of Canadians, not so he can sleep. Reckless disregard for administration of authority loses ME sleep.

Consider this:

His quote:

"When it comes to safety, I don't think anything is overkill," said Garneau in response to a reporter's question.

"I have read almost on a daily basis reports from pilots coming into airports, on the flight path, and reporting seeing a drone off the wing."

Note:

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) reported 65,139 bird strikes for 2011-14, and the Federal Aviation Authority counted 177,269 wildlife strike reports on civil aircraft between 1990 and 2015, growing 38% in 7 years from 2009 to 2015. Birds accounted for 97%.

Confirmed worldwide drone strikes through 2016: Zero.

Goose: 18-24lbs, up to 73" wingspan. Population appx 4 million primarily North America.

Phantom: 3lbs, restricted from airport airspace, appx 2.5 million North America.

Note that these numbers are Geese and Phantoms only. I'm quite certain the overall bird population far surpasses that of the overall drone population but I don't have the stats.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mikehhfx
The following is an article from Forbes. Com which pretty much sums up the garbage we need to enlighten our "elected" officials on. I have highlighted a few key points:

"It never made much sense for the FAA to call on pilots to report seeing a drone from the air. After all, it’s very difficult to distinguish small objects from a moving plane or to distinguish a drone from a bird or a balloon. This is particularly true of the small consumer drones that most hobbyists fly. The FAA was so concerned about these small drones that it set up a whole new bureaucratic registration system just over a year ago for those weighing just over half a pound (.55 pounds, to be exact.) But these small drones have proven to have a remarkable safety record over the last few years of their exponential growth. As an unvetted "database", the reports were bound to be a waste of time and money and only lead to sensational headlines about the number of pilot “near misses” with drones.

Nonetheless, the FAA has continued to collect these reports and Thursday released its latest database which covers the period from February through September 2016. In total there were 1,274 drone sightings reported to the FAA during this time. I reviewed a sampling of those reports: the 59 reported drone sightings from September 1 to 15 of last year. Based on my review of the other reports, this sampling is fairly representative of what the rest of the sightings show. Which in brief is: not much.

Of these 59 reported sightings, 52 were by pilots: 15 airline, 27 general aviation, 9 helicopter and 1 US military. The remaining 7 reports were by 4 individuals, 2 police officers and one air traffic controller. (The FAA does not categorize the reports as airline or general aviation, I made this distinction based on the type of aircraft the FAA identified.) Of the reports that listed the drone’s altitude, 22 reported the drone was at an altitude over 1,000 feet but less than 5,000 feet and 14 reported an altitude higher than 5,000 feet, with four reporting drones at over 10,000 feet. One was reported by an airline pilot at 15,000 feet. One pilot reported seeing a drone two miles away from him. Seventeen reports were below 1,000 feet and six had no altitude listed. Some reports are of drones over a city without specifying how that particular operation was hazardous or contrary to the regulations.

In 50 of the 52 pilot reports, no evasive action was taken or reported by the crew. In two cases, pilots reported taking evasive action. One involved a medevac helicopter who saw the drone and turned to avoid it. The closest reported distance was a tenth of a mile. The other was a Cessna 172 that reported turning to avoid “a very small” drone at 5,500 feet. The drone was reported to be black with one rotor flying about 200-300 feet above and to the left of the aircraft.

It’s impossible to know in the vast majority of these sightings whether the pilots saw a drone or something else. At altitudes of 5,000 feet and higher, it’s hard to imagine that these are the small consumer drones that the FAA was so concerned about. In fact, in several of the reports, the pilots themselves state they are unsure if what they saw was a balloon or a drone.

Reporting drone sightings that cannot be verified and appear to have no safety impact doesn’t make much sense. At a minimum these reports should be screened to eliminate those sightings that are too speculative to reach conclusions about and focus on the handful that appear to have potential safety impacts."

Here is the link to the actual article:
Latest Reports Prove FAA Should Just Stop Tracking Pilot Drone Sightings
 
The US government introduced a law to prevent travellers from "certain countries" carrying "large electronic items" on flights. A few days later, the UK introduces the same law. And of course, the lunatic asylum which is the current Whitehouse Administration never "leaned" on the UK government, even the slightest bit.

So, no more laptops, tablets (I would imagine), drones (not even a Mavic, and with or without batteries I'm sure), sharks with frickin' laser beams on their heads, nothing. Of course, any terrorist wanting to blow up a plane using an electronic device would need a "large electronic device" to do it. That smartphone in their pocket is incapable of such a function.
 
I slept on this and it didn't get any better.

I'm trying to imagine a place where I am never or never have the potential to be within 450' of people, let alone a building or animal. I'm trying to figure out where these members that say it's not going to change their flying habits are flying.

In reality, any public place is off limits. Anyone can come along to any public place at any time whether they were there when you launched or not.

That leaves private property. How many people have private property that has minimum 450' from any neighbour, building, or animal?

My parents have a hobby farm of 30 acres but they are aging and plan on selling this year. I've done virtually all my "practice flying" there before spring comes.

Once they've sold, I haven't yet determined where I can fly that complies with the letter of the law, and I mean that in all sincerity.

Again, any public property YOU can go to fly, someone else can be there or show up at.

Am I missing something here?
Well Sadly I cannot now technically fly my drone on my own property as I am certainly within 75 metres of my home. I had some friends in this weekend who wanted to see me fly my drone as they were curious. It was a perfectly calm sunny day and I was hesitant given the knew regulations. I did fly like 50 feet up around my front yard and still thought my god if someone calls to complain I can face a fine...this is madness!!
 
His quote: "When it comes to safety, I don't think anything is overkill," said Garneau in response to a reporter's question.
"I have read almost on a daily basis reports from pilots coming into airports, on the flight path, and reporting seeing a drone off the wing."

Considering he is well educated, served time in the Canadian Navy (not as a pilot, I might add), became a Canadian Astronaut, went into space a few times, is a politician, Minister of Transport and has multiple "honorary degrees" (a lot gets handed to you once you have been into space).

I am not surprised by these actions he has taken regarding recreational drone flying. This guy is hungry for power (twice failed to become leader of Liberal party of Canada - yikes imagine him as PM)! IMO, he feels the need to leave his mark somewhere other than in outer space and this scenario with the recreational drones is just one of the ways he can do it (again, in his mind)..

This drone incident form is one of his ideas to get better control of these demons - all he is doing is encouraging non-drone owners to report everything they can't identify in the sky, as a drone......... looks like a 4 year old did it up Drone incident report form - Transport Canada.

Back in June of 2016 he also "quite proudly" showed off the "No Drone Zone" signage which is available in various formats to interested airports, parks and municipalities who would like to post signage around the perimeter of their property or event. https://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/ca-opssvs/NODRONEZONE_EN_FR_GC_36inx24in.pdf

Be prepared for the worst in June 2017, what's coming then, that couldn't have been released now with these new regulations - think about it? Maybe this initial release is mere "baby steps" to get us all prepared (in his mind) for the worst which is yet to come in June.
 
Considering he is well educated, served time in the Canadian Navy (not as a pilot, I might add), became a Canadian Astronaut, went into space a few times, is a politician, Minister of Transport and has multiple "honorary degrees" (a lot gets handed to you once you have been into space).

I am not surprised by these actions he has taken regarding recreational drone flying. This guy is hungry for power (twice failed to become leader of Liberal party of Canada - yikes imagine him as PM)! IMO, he feels the need to leave his mark somewhere other than in outer space and this scenario with the recreational drones is just one of the ways he can do it (again, in his mind)..

This drone incident form is one of his ideas to get better control of these demons - all he is doing is encouraging non-drone owners to report everything they can't identify in the sky, as a drone......... looks like a 4 year old did it up Drone incident report form - Transport Canada.

Back in June of 2016 he also "quite proudly" showed off the "No Drone Zone" signage which is available in various formats to interested airports, parks and municipalities who would like to post signage around the perimeter of their property or event. https://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/ca-opssvs/NODRONEZONE_EN_FR_GC_36inx24in.pdf

Be prepared for the worst in June 2017, what's coming then, that couldn't have been released now with these new regulations - think about it? Maybe this initial release is mere "baby steps" to get us all prepared (in his mind) for the worst which is yet to come in June.
I just looked at the drone incident report! So if I am flying in the sticks away from anyone and anything and following all the new rules a hunter sees the drone fly by a bird and I am technically breaking the law, Wildlife!
 
And that is why we need to try to ensure we get as many people to join NODE as possible so we have a cohesive voice to represent us...

DJI drone or not,,join up and make a voice. Let's not do the Canadian thing and just accept what has been given to us..
Oh I joined today and was happy to be part of it!! I would like to know peoples thoughts as to what exactly to presently do?? Should I simply sell my drone, continue to fly responsibly avoiding people as much as possible staying totally away from airports and keeping my atitiude down as much as possible or do I follow the regulations and simply not fly!! I see no other options!
 
Can't sleep at night as our Transport Minister?

Garneau says the government wanted to make the changes before a drone hits an airplane and causes a catastrophe (not that a 40 pound Canada Goose couldn't accomplish the same thing).

“That’s the kind of nightmare scenario that keeps me awake at night as your transport minister,” - (give me a break will ya - this is so laughable - so once the new regulations are in place and become law every single recreational drone pilot is going to obey each and every one of the new regulations - how magical is that, how this will help you sleep Mr. Garneau is beyond me)

Garneau: "the new rules should go a long way to ensuring safe drone use and won’t harm growth in the drone industry" - (LOL, tell that to DJI and their competitors - this is proof he is a politician and not a business man)!.

Garneau: “those objects that are being controlled can sometimes, if they fail or they’re used improperly, can do damage simply by falling out of the sky and we have had incidents of that.” (yup, and that goes for anything falling from the sky doesn't it.......as to drones, well all the more reason to regulate them, trouble is sometimes that **** drone has a mind of its own and just takes off - hmm, now what?

Transport Canada says anyone who sees someone flying a drone illegally should call 911 (expect to have the law show up some time while you are flying - legally or not).
 
IMO,, follow the rules for now to show we are legitimately trying to be responsible.

There will be those that don't but that actually works in our favor as we can point out that, like cars, not everyone will obey the speed limit..

I still see a lot of cars on the road. BUT flying near airports is just stupid. The last few days I was out of town and saw a drone flying less than 1 km from an airport,, that really does not help our cause.

My best advice, fly legal until this can be resolved. Join NODE and let the responsibility of proving ALL drone operators are irresponsible.
 
"When it comes to safety, I don't think anything is overkill," said Garneau in response to a reporter's question.

That says it all doesn't it as to what's next!

He also has stated these latest regulations are temporary until they finalize the "permanent regulations" likely by June of this year, 3 months from now.

These latest regulations are strictly a stepping stone, a warning of what is to come next. Seriously, as I mentioned in a previous post, what difference is 3 months going to make - I am convinced they (he) knows already what lies ahead and is taking baby steps so as to prepare us (in his mind).

Let's not kid ourselves here - this guy is on a mission to either eliminate recreational drone flying or have every owner of one, be either a licensed pilot or very near the same as to getting permission to fly.(or perhaps he did this 3 months early to get some sleep, since he says this keeps him up at a night with worry over these **** drones)

Does anyone really think there is even a slight chance of sending this guy or his office the very best laid out letter, petition etc. - stating all kinds of facts relative to actual drone incidents or accidents that will manage to change his mind on what he wants to do -- no way, this is the type of person, who, when they get into a "position of power", will, as he has shown, not listen to anything that might hinder his train of thought on what it is, he wants to accomplish.
 

Recent Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,357
Members
104,935
Latest member
Pauos31