Country column by Paul Millard

I’VE written in these pages before about the challenge of regulation keeping pace with change – well the CLA was in the news recently on that very point following a Government consultation on drones.

There is, of course, a long list of extremely helpful tasks that can be performed by drones – monitoring built and natural heritage, stock and crop management and not forgetting recreation. 

So we are not anti drones - neither are we trying to make life difficult for legitimate operators or pilots – but there are real concerns which relate particularly to a new breed of recreational users and there is a need to offer proper protection to people, property and livestock.

The price of drones has fallen dramatically and consequently we’ve seen the use of drones, for both commercial and recreational purposes, expand rapidly thankfully, we no longer need to send the local builder up a long ladder to inspect the battlements and the gutters, we can get the grandson to do it and then review the results at our leisure.

So the potential application for a wide range of industries, not least agriculture, is tremendously exciting, but, of course, there is a “but” - and it is that we do need regulation to keep pace with the changes that are taking place.

Much of it is about education, a better and clearer understanding of what you can and cannot do with your drone, what is legal, what is acceptable and what your obligations and liabilities might be.

If, for whatever reason, your 20 kg drone comes crashing out of the sky, it has the potential to cause a fair degree of damage to both people and property and if it does, then you are liable – and you need to be properly insured to cover that risk.

Similarly, you need to know that the sky is not free space – you can’t happy-go-lucky fly your drone wherever you please, you need to get permission before flying over privately owned land or property and you should never fly within 50 metres of people or buildings.

There are a whole set of guidelines in place, but currently, there’s nothing which legally requires training or an assessment of capability for recreational drone users – and there’s no register of who owns, or flies, drones.

We think that’s important because, in addition to the risk of these machines causing panic among livestock and the potential to create a very real feeling of invasion of privacy, there is also the slightly darker side because there is no doubt that drones can be as readily used to support criminal activity as they can to support legitimate purposes.

There is clear potential for criminals to use these machines to identify what machinery and equipment is available in and around farm yards and to identify vulnerable areas in yards and buildings. Cattle and sheep can be located in remote areas and routes in and out of those areas quickly identified.  

There needs to be reassurance that drones being flown over private property or land are being done so legally, professionally and safely. 

We want to see changes to the Civil Aviation Act 1982 which, in addition to a system of registration and insurance, would also mean recreational drone users would be required to seek the landowners’ permission before flying over private land.