Drone Trespass Bill, Mean anything to to the Corner Case?

[elks96]

Just reading through current legislation in WY. Came across drone trespassing bill.

While this is meant to apply only to drones, it does include the 200 foot above the ground threshold. Could the establishment of this 200 foot above ground become an issue for corner crossing? Does is establish that a property owner does in fact own the air above the land as well?

Curious to see what others think.

https://wyoleg.gov/Legislation/2022/HB0128

 

[elks96]

I could see this being a potential night mare for municipalities to enforce. Given the number of drones and the fact that finding the owner operator is pretty rough. On the flipside I don't exactly like drones, and would prefer them not in my area. I would also like to establish how they can determine is a drone is at 100 feet or 200 or 180 or 210. Also how do you prove 100% it was actually over your land and not just off?

 

[Nebsy]

Another waste of governance. Create laws that are unenforceable and, most likely, contrary to existing law.

 

[BigJohnson]

I am sure it is related to the corner crossing case. It adds strength to the airspace BS argument. People better keep an eye on this.

 

[Seamaster]

Airspace that can be navigated by aircraft is generally the space over 500 feet from ground level. I believe that we will see strong air space laws aimed at drone usage. There seems to be support for allowing a "drone zone" in the layer between 400 and 500 feet in many places, although there will certainly be drone corridors at much lower height (maybe 200 feet) in many urban areas.

Drone laws will probably add strength to landowners' rights and that could very well impact the corner crossing issue.

 

[N_Corey]

The problem that won’t be resolved in legislation like this is drones have the ability to invade your personal space and privacy far more than someone simply trying to recreate on public land and crossing a corner. The corner crossing issue is simply fueled by greed.