Ron..NE ILL..10/48 - 1/20/2016 06:02

I don't understand the Feds position. If anyone holds either a student pilot license, or a private pilot license, they can take an airplane, or any type of certificated aircraft they are licensed for, and fly over their own holdings (farms or otherwise) for hours on end & take photos without being either a commercially rated pilot, or falling under Part 135, which doesn't cover aerial photos anyway. The FAA doesn't consider taking photos from airplanes as a "commercial venture". This is & has been the Feds rules forever on real airplane things. By the way, circling over a corn field & taking photos with only 1 person can be done by remote mounted cameras, or video. Now, if you go hire the pilot, then that pilot may need to be commercially rated. The airplane may need to be under 100 hr inspection routine...depending. But, if you own the airplane & you are the pilot & it's your photos, then no commercial needed.

So, why the difference in drones where there are no humans aboard?

Again, I suggest if you farm & have concerns on either today or tomorrow's use (any time in the future), you need to contact your local Farm Bureau & suggest they continue to support ag use of drones. I'm not suggesting they only be used for ag purposes, but that seems to be our common rallying point. Likewise, if you feel that drones are a detriment to society as a whole, make the call also.

I'm not against drone regulations. I'm not against aircraft regulations. I think both of them need to be thought out & considered before implementation. Calling drone work of photographing one's own fields, regardless of size, as a commercial venture itself is wrong.