Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

Fast following my arse!

Time to bore the pants off you again with a column about drones or, in this case, drone regulations here in New Zealand.

From time to time I like to indulge myself and have a rant on such matters. Sadly for you, today is one of those times.

Like most countries, New Zealand has regulations to control the use of drones, be they used for recreational activities or commercial purposes. The rationale is that such devices pose a threat to the safety of people, property and aviation therefore their use must be restricted so as to minimize that risk.

New Zealand's current drone laws were conjured up over a decade ago, when the magnitude and nature of the "drone risk" was relatively unknown because these were pretty new devices with little historical data to go on.

As a result of this dearth of data, the regulations were somewhat over-restrictive and erred on the side of caution. That's how responsible regulators usually work. They figure it's better to be safe than sorry.

CAA has stated that in respect to regulation it considers itself to be a "fast follower" of other nations rather than one that lives on the cutting edge.

However, in a few short weeks it will be 2026 and while most other countries have updated their drone regulations many times in the past decade, New Zealand's have been left pretty much unchanged.

During that period, drone technology has also advanced at quite a pace. Drones are now far more sophisticated, more reliable, lighter and safer than they have ever been.

Back in 2015 when the NZ CAA rolled out their drone rules (Part 101 and Part 102 of the Civil Aviation Regulations), even a "small" drone weighed as much as a kilo and could be difficult to control. "Fly-away" events were not uncommon and as with all new technology, failures were something that were to be expected.

Jump forwards to today and a small drone weighs just 15-20g. The flight control and radio link technology is so advanced that many of these new tiny drones now automatically avoid obstacles, automatically return to their take-off point in the event of problems, warn users if they're about to fly in a potentially dangerous location and have a myriad of other safety features built in.

Yet none of this is reflected in the rules under which they're flown here in NZ.

While almost every other country in the world has recognised the much lower (some might say "negligible") risk posed by drones with a mass of under 250g, New Zealand steadfastly refuses to do so and still considers one of those tiny 20g toys to be every bit as dangerous as a huge 14Kg octocopter drone with flesh-cleaving carbon-fibre propellers.

After repeated "consultations", CAA has still failed to demonstrate any willingness to relax its rules on smaller drones used for recreational purposes -- placing us at odds with the rest of the developed world.

On the 22nd of this month, some incredibly minor tweaks to the rules do come into effect however.

Sadly, this is not the type of update drone users were hoping for. Instead of acknowledging the vastly improved safety and reduced risk associated with small drones, CAA has simply tightened the ropes of regulation even more.

For instance, section 207 of part 101 of the rules which controls flight over property, the rule has been changed from one of an seemingly advisory nature to one of strict compliance by replacing the word "shall" with "must".

Sigh!

There is expected to be more consultation on rule updates later next year but changes, if any, are unlikely to be signed into effect until 2027. Odds are that we'll see nothing but further restriction along with the introduction of registration, mandatory testing and such.

Perhaps it's time for the obligatory reminder:

At the time I write this, and after a decade and a half of such activities all over the world, not one single person has died (anywhere, ever) as the result of the recreational use of multirotor drones. Likewise, the level of property damage produced by this activity is so low as to be virtually unmeasured.

Apparently a *perfect* safety record isn't good enough for CAA NZ though. We must do better and that means more regulation, more restriction, more cost for those who would dare to fly a 20g toy, even inside their own home.

This lunacy has to stop because right now CAA is shooting itself in the foot. They have already acknowledged that compliance with the current drone rules is low and falling. This is mainly because people see those rules as unjust and unreasonable in light of the proven very low risk of such activities. To simply add insult to injury by tightening regulation even further will, I'm sure, see the effectiveness of the current rules eroded even more by increased levels of non-compliance.

Rules are only effective rules when there is compliance and to knowingly persist with a ruleset that fosters non-compliance is, in my honest opinion, an act of recklessness on the part of CAA.

A refusal to acknowledge the proven low-risk associated with small recreationally flown drones is perhaps a sad indictment on the culture of CAA. It appears that safety isn't the primary objective after all and the claim to be a "fast follower" in respect to regulation is nothing but a lie.

This must change.

Carpe Diem folks!

Please visit the sponsor!

Here is a PERMANENT link to this column

Rank This Aardvark Page

Change Font