Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, commonly referred to as drones, have been used by the military and law enforcement agencies around the country for part of a decade. Their increased and continued use has sparked debate, pitting privacy against security and convenience.
For the most part, this debate has remained a national one. But as technology has become more readily available, police departments around the country have gained access to drones. This has led legislative bodies around the country to take notice, and in some cases set limitations on their use.
Amidst privacy concerns, Idaho joined this movement in April, when state legislators passed a bill limiting drone use by requiring a strict warrant to use a drone. Protecting privacy and citizen rights is a noble pursuit, but going forward, Idahoans need to ensure legitimate drone use is not limited by exaggerated concerns.
Drone surveillance was already covered under current laws without the need for legislation. A careful approach to privacy is indeed a necessity, but Idahoans need to remember that UAVs are more than aerial privacy abuse machines.
These unmanned drones could be of great use to Idaho for many reasons outside tracking criminals and spying on citizens. Drones have been used by the Forest Service to spot wildfires, they have been used to monitor salmon populations in hard to reach mountain rivers and they have been used to search for missing hunters and hikers. However, privacy legislation and new FAA regulations have hindered many of these valuable efforts.
Idaho legislation has created stringent limitations on drone availability, limiting their use when privacy may be violated. As a result, the use of drones is heavily limited when private land may be under their watchful eye. Idaho is a state with millions of acres of privately owned and incredibly rural land, but sadly natural disasters does not care for convenience.
Wildfires and missing people do not keep themselves on state owned lands — these problems can pop up anywhere in the state. Drones have given the state of Idaho a new way to combat these otherwise strenuous circumstances.
Allowing credible agencies such as the Forest Service to bypass these limitations can legitimately combat the potential dangers of using drones, and should have been the end goal of any legislation passed.
Sadly, that goal was not met, and legitimate drone use is now more difficult than it should be.
Protecting privacy is important, but we should not limit technology out of sensationalized fear.
Careful discussion of the issue may have prevented these issues. Instead, Idahoan’s received pseudo-legitimate debate and sensationalized legislation, which has been detrimental to a useful technology.
Justin Ackerman can be reached at [email protected]