Risk and reward at the dawn of civilian drone age
Mar 30, 2013 3:06 AM (ET)
By JOAN LOWY
Associated Press
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20130330/DA5B8TUO0.html
WASHINGTON (AP) - The dawn of the age of aerial civilian drones is rich
with possibilities for people far from the war zones where they made
their devastating mark as a weapon of choice against terrorists.
The unmanned, generally small aircraft can steer water and pesticides to
crops with precision, saving farmers money while reducing environmental
risk. They can inspect distant bridges, pipelines and power lines and
find hurricane victims stranded on rooftops.
Drones - some as tiny as a hummingbird - promise everyday benefits as
broad as the sky is wide. But the drone industry and those eager to tap
its potential are running headlong into fears the peeping-eye,
go-anywhere technology will be misused.
Since January, drone-related legislation has been introduced in more
than 30 states, largely in response to privacy concerns. Many of the
bills would prevent police from using drones for broad public
surveillance or to watch individuals without sufficient grounds to
believe they were involved in crimes.
Stephen Ingley, executive director of the Airborne Law Enforcement
Association, says resistance to the technology is frustrating. Drones
"clearly have so much potential for saving lives, and it's a darn shame
we're having to go through this right now," he said.
But privacy advocates say now is the time to debate the proper use of
civilian drones and set rules, before they become ubiquitous. Sentiment
for curbing domestic drone use has brought the left and right together
perhaps more than any other recent issue.
"The thought of government drones buzzing overhead and constantly
monitoring the activities of law-abiding citizens runs contrary to the
notion of what it means to live in a free society," Sen. Charles
Grassley, R-Iowa, said at a recent hearing of the Senate Judiciary
Committee.
With military budgets shrinking, drone makers have been counting on the
civilian market to spur the industry's growth. Some companies that make
drones or supply support equipment and services say the uncertainty has
caused them to put U.S. expansion plans on hold, and they are looking
overseas for new markets.
"Our lack of success in educating the public about unmanned aircraft is
coming back to bite us," said Robert Fitzgerald, CEO of the BOSH Group
of Newport News, Va., which provides support services to drone users.
"The U.S. has been at the lead of this technology a long time," he said.
"If our government holds back this technology, there's the freedom to
move elsewhere ... and all of a sudden these things will be flying
everywhere else and competing with us."
Law enforcement is expected to be one of the bigger initial markets for
civilian drones. Last month, the FBI used drones to maintain continuous
surveillance of a bunker in Alabama where a 5-year-old boy was being
held hostage.
In Virginia, the state General Assembly passed a bill that would place a
two-year moratorium on the use of drones by state and local law
enforcement. The measure is supported by groups as varied as the
American Civil Liberties Union on the left and the Virginia Tea Party
Patriots Federation on the right.
Gov. Bob McDonnell is proposing amendments that would retain the broad
ban on spy drones but allow specific exemptions when lives are in
danger, such as for search-and rescue operations. The legislature
reconvenes on April 3 to consider the matter.
Seattle abandoned its drone program after community protests in
February. The city's police department had purchased two drones through
a federal grant without consulting the city council.
In Congress, Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., co-chairman of the House's privacy
caucus, has introduced a bill that prohibits the Federal Aviation
Administration from issuing drone licenses unless the applicant provides
a statement explaining who will operate the drone, where it will be
flown, what kind of data will be collected, how the data will be used,
whether the information will be sold to third parties and the period for
which the information will be retained.
Privacy advocates acknowledge the many benign uses of drones. In Mesa
County, Colo., for example, an annual landfill survey using manned
aircraft cost about $10,000. The county recently performed the same
survey using a drone for about $200.
Drones can help police departments find missing people, reconstruct
traffic accidents and act as lookouts for SWAT teams. Real estate agents
can have them film videos of properties and surrounding neighborhoods,
offering clients a better-than-bird's-eye view though one that neighbors
may not wish to have shared.
"Any legislation that restricts the use of this kind of capability to
serve the public is putting the public at risk," said Steve Gitlin, vice
president of AeroVironment, a leading maker of smaller drones.
Yet the virtues of drones can also make them dangerous, privacy
advocates say. The low cost and ease of use may encourage police and
others to conduct the kind of continuous or intrusive surveillance that
might otherwise be impractical.
Drones can be equipped with high-powered cameras and listening devices,
and infrared cameras that can see people in the dark.
"High-rise buildings, security fences or even the walls of a building
are not barriers to increasingly common drone technology," Amie
Stepanovich, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Council's
surveillance project, told the Senate panel.
Civilian drone use is limited to government agencies and public
universities that have received a few hundred permits from the FAA. A
law passed by Congress last year requires the FAA to open U.S. skies to
widespread drone flights by 2015, but the agency is behind schedule and
it's doubtful it will meet that deadline. Lawmakers and industry
officials have complained for years about the FAA's slow progress.
The FAA estimates that within five years of gaining broader access about
7,500 civilian drones will be in use.
Although the Supreme Court has not dealt directly with drones, it has
OK'd aerial surveillance without warrants in drug cases in which
officers in a plane or helicopter spotted marijuana plants growing on a
suspect's property.
But in a case involving the use of ground-based equipment, the court
said police generally need a warrant before using a thermal imaging
device to detect hot spots in a home that might indicate that marijuana
plants are being grown there.
In some states economic concerns have trumped public unease. In
Oklahoma, an anti-drone bill was shelved at the request of Republican
Gov. Mary Fallin, who was concerned it might hinder growth of the
state's drone industry. The North Dakota state Senate killed a drone
bill in part because it might impede the state's chances of being
selected by the Federal Aviation Administration as one of six national
drone test sites, which could generate local jobs.
A bill that would have limited the ability of state and local
governments to use drones died in the Washington legislature. The
measure was opposed by the Boeing Co. (BA), which employs more than
80,000 workers in the state and which has a subsidiary, Insitu, that's a
leading military drone manufacturer.
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., recently drew attention to the domestic use of
drones when he staged a Senate filibuster, demanding to know whether the
president has authority to use weaponized drones to kill Americans on
American soil. The White House said no, if the person isn't engaged in
combat. Industry officials worry that the episode could temporarily set
back civilian drone use.
"The opposition has become very loud," said Gitlin of AeroVironment,
"but we are confident that over time the benefits of these solutions are
going to far outweigh the concerns, and they'll become part of normal
life in the future."
_______________________________________________
Medianews mailing list
[email protected]
http://etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews_etskywarn.net
