I live in the "City of Stirling" in Western Australia, which is not a "city" in the usual sense, but a huge collection of suburbs
The City ran a calendar competion and the winner of the calendar cover, was a fairly average drone photo.
But  drones are banned in Stirling, which is why I didn't enter the competion.

So the cover of the official local government calendar is promoting "illegal" activity

But  drones are banned in Stirling
Check your details, drones aren't banned in Stirling at all.
Stirling Council doesn't allow the use of drones on or from local government property.
https://www.stirling.wa.gov.au/your-city/documents-and-publications/your-city/about-council/governance-and-transparency/policies/motorised-model-aeroplanes-policy

Time to start entering the contest!!!

Labroides Posted at 12-4 18:49
But  drones are banned in Stirling
Check your details, drones aren't banned in Stirling at all.
Stirling Council doesn't allow the use of drones on or from local government property.

Incorrect.
Only two, tiny grassed areas are allowed and the pilot has to be a paid-up member of one of two local clubs to use either of these tiny areas.
The photo which won the competition is a beach, a long way from either of these grassed areas

TonyPHX Posted at 12-4 18:53
Time to start entering the contest!!!

Too late

ReproRetro Posted at 12-4 19:25
Incorrect.
Only two, tiny grassed areas are allowed and the pilot has to be a paid-up member of one of two local clubs to use either of these tiny areas.
The photo which won the competition is a beach, a long way from either of these grassed areas

I included a link to the council policy.
That's not what it says.
Can you point to anything to support your assertion?

Labroides Posted at 12-4 20:58
I included a link to the council policy.
That's not what it says.
Can you point to anything to support your assertion?

Yes
Under the Scope "Scope
This policy restricts the use of ... drones ... on or from local government property except for where a permit is issued to authorised clubs utilising Yokine Regional Open Space, Wordsworth Avenue, Yokine, Hertha Road Reserve, Hertha Road, Stirling ..."

Local government property refers to the entire City of Stirling.
So, the only place drones are allowed are Yokine Open Space and Hertha Road Reserve - two small grassed areas.

Also:
1. WA Radio Soarers Inc and Soaring Model Society WA are permitted to use the Yokine Regional
Open Space.
2. Perth Radio Helicopter Club is permitted to use Hertha Road Reserve
5. Only members of the above clubs are permitted to use motorised model aeroplanes and gliders at
Yokine Regional Open Space, Wordsworth Avenue, Yokine and Hertha Road Reserve, Hertha Road,
Stirling.

ReproRetro Posted at 12-4 21:21
Yes
Under the Scope "Scope
This policy restricts the use of ... drones ... on or from local government property except for where a permit is issued to authorised clubs utilising Yokine Regional Open Space, Wordsworth Avenue, Yokine, Hertha Road Reserve, Hertha Road, Stirling ..."

Local government property refers to the entire City of Stirling.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
You think that the council owns all property within the local government area?

Labroides Posted at 12-4 23:09
Local government property refers to the entire City of Stirling.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
You think that the council owns all property within the local government area?

My aplogy, I meant any land or property under the control of the local government, including thoroughfares, verges, parks, lakes, beaches, waterways, etc, but not private properties.
So, it definitely includes beaches.

However - getting back to the actual  point of my original post - they do not permit the use of recreational drones at beaches, yet awarded a prize to a member of the public for a photo of a City of Stirling beach from a drone

It's a paradox, isn't it.
A similar situation here where a recerational drone pilot flew over and from a NT park to film a cloud inversion, and then the BBC publish it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-derbyshire-63839163

Blériot53 Posted at 12-5 00:11
It's a paradox, isn't it.
A similar situation here where a recerational drone pilot flew over and from a NT park to film a cloud inversion, and then the BBC publish it.

That looks amazing

This happens quite often unfortunately.

ReproRetro Posted at 12-5 01:15
That looks amazing

I've been up there. The views are spectacular. Never seen that cloud formation though.

Montfrooij Posted at 12-5 01:17
This happens quite often unfortunately.

Yes, indeed :|

ReproRetro Posted at 12-5 01:24
Yes, indeed :|

ANd I really wonder why

Blériot53 Posted at 12-5 01:19
I've been up there. The views are spectacular. Never seen that cloud formation though.

Maybe one day

Montfrooij Posted at 12-5 01:24
ANd I really wonder why

The Council probably thinks people use drones just for spying and perving.

ReproRetro Posted at 12-5 01:24
Maybe one day

If I ever get up early enough

Blériot53 Posted at 12-5 01:26
If I ever get up early enough

Camp on the peak

Blériot53 Posted at 12-5 00:11
It's a paradox, isn't it.
A similar situation here where a recerational drone pilot flew over and from a NT park to film a cloud inversion, and then the BBC publish it.

Looks great but surely breaks VLOS rules?

So why could the drone have taken off from private property adjacent to the jetty?

DAFlys Posted at 12-5 01:48
So why could the drone have taken off from private property adjacent to the jetty?

[view_image]

Yes, theoretically it could have taken off from and landed on a private property.

ReproRetro Posted at 12-5 01:57
Yes, theoretically it could have taken off from and landed on a private property.

I can just see the pilot door knocking.  

ReproRetro Posted at 12-5 01:43
Camp on the peak

If you want a few glimpses of the area:

DAFlys Posted at 12-5 01:44
Looks great but surely breaks VLOS rules?

And it's in the NT NFZ.

Blériot53 Posted at 12-5 11:05
If you want a few glimpses of the area:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=588bLBfxi4Q

Nice, smooth shooting

Blériot53 Posted at 12-5 11:09
And it's in the NT NFZ.

In the NT on the QT ;)

ReproRetro Posted at 12-5 16:37
Nice, smooth shooting

Thanks

ReproRetro Posted at 12-5 16:37
In the NT on the QT ;)

Effectively, yes

My take on this (and anything that I publish) is 'could it have been taken legally' ... (note: not WAS it taken legally).
If there's somewhere I could have been standing so that the flight was legit, then it's fine. I'd not publish anything which didn't have a possibility of it being permitted.

If it just so happened I was on the beach instead of inside that back garden, then who's to know once the photos are taken and I'm not there any longer.

Blériot53 Posted at 12-5 11:09
And it's in the NT NFZ.

Ah the National Tru$t

I can't fathom the fees that my clients have paid on my behalf over the years for commercial drone permits, but I think the worst was at Glastonbury Tor when the client was paying £300 an hour for an all day shoot.

CloudVisual Posted at 12-6 01:07
Ah the National Tru$t

I can't fathom the fees that my clients have paid on my behalf over the years for commercial drone permits, but I think the worst was at Glastonbury Tor when the client was paying £300 an hour for an all day shoot.

It's always about money

M3P-ch Posted at 12-6 01:06
My take on this (and anything that I publish) is 'could it have been taken legally' ... (note: not WAS it taken legally).
If there's somewhere I could have been standing so that the flight was legit, then it's fine. I'd not publish anything which didn't have a possibility of it being permitted.

No harm, no foul

Blériot53 Posted at 12-5 11:09
And it's in the NT NFZ.

So that will depend where he took off from then.

DAFlys Posted at 12-6 01:42
So that will depend where he took off from then.

well he clearly states that he climbed the hill and then launched the drone,  so   
Whereas it's perfectly possible to park by a public road nearby and fly the drone from there.

Blériot53 Posted at 12-6 01:51
well he clearly states that he climbed the hill and then launched the drone,  so   
Whereas it's perfectly possible to park by a public road nearby and fly the drone from there.

I must confess I missed that fact.

DAFlys Posted at 12-6 02:01
I must confess I missed that fact.

I doubt the drone police will chase him up.

Blériot53 Posted at 12-6 02:06
I doubt the drone police will chase him up.

You're probably right there.

Blériot53 Posted at 12-6 02:06
I doubt the drone police will chase him up.

When working on another NT site (White Cliffs of Dover), we had a ranger with us. I asked him what the process was for dealing with unauthorised drones.

He said, we follow the drone back to the person and tell them not to fly it.

Almost makes it worth the risk really, if you're doing it recreationally that is.

M3P-ch Posted at 12-6 01:06
My take on this (and anything that I publish) is 'could it have been taken legally' ... (note: not WAS it taken legally).
If there's somewhere I could have been standing so that the flight was legit, then it's fine. I'd not publish anything which didn't have a possibility of it being permitted.

Or you could have launched the drone by hand (and caught it by hand) so it never touched government land