• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

EPA Spying on Ranchers

Why would they fly, when there is no need? There are already satellites passing overhead every few minutes. The EU monitors their farmers' subsidy payments claims by confirming the acreage and nature of the crop by pushing buttons on a computer.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Why would they fly, when there is no need? There are already satellites passing overhead every few minutes. The EU monitors their farmers' subsidy payments claims by confirming the acreage and nature of the crop by pushing buttons on a computer.
Click to expand...

Part of obamas stimulus plan maybe, employ pilots.
 
jamesrage said:
The 4th amendment is not about privacy.The 4th amendment is about law enforcement needing a warrant in order to conduct a search and seizure. People flying aircraft over you property to look for something is a search.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Click to expand...
You're extrapolating the limits of the 4th Amendment beyond what they really say, and even mean. The skies belong to the government (read: public), not the individual property owners, and as such they are not violating any private property laws whatsoever. Just as the government also owns the public streets, and can sit there and use devices such as binoculars and cameras to observe as much as they can into private property, they can use the same concept with the public skies.

There is NOTHING in the 4th Amendment that limits law enforcement from investigating anything they want as long as they do it from a distance. Public areas are a distance. Warrants and the such are only necessary when they want to search the actual property itself.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Why would they fly, when there is no need? There are already satellites passing overhead every few minutes. The EU monitors their farmers' subsidy payments claims by confirming the acreage and nature of the crop by pushing buttons on a computer.
Click to expand...
The same thought occurred to me.

The only thing I can think of really has nothing to do with efficiency, and everything to do with US society's mindset that individual agencies must have power and be independent. For example, since 9-11, many police agencies now have SWAT teams (and/or the associated equipment) that really don't need it.
 
Billy the Kid said:
U.S. News - EPA planes spying on ranchers? Lawmakers want answers

"A Nebraska cattlemen’s group is pushing the Environmental Protection Agency to stop pollution-control flights over ranches, claiming it amounts to spying on citizens. EPA, meanwhile, says the flights are an effective way to quickly spot -- and stop -- pollution from manure lagoons and other waste at large livestock operations."


Ya just gotta love the gov't. I guess the EPA just wants to make sure all ranchers are walking in lockstep.


Wonder how they got a warrant to do this? Wonder who's next on the spy-in-the-sky's "lookie see" program? Maybe your backyard?
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know about that: such agencies are making fly overs of neighborhoods that have homes with pools to look for ones that are green with stagnant water, and fining those homeowners for providing misquito breedng grounds (that spread diseases and create health hazards). So the idea that the EPA is really performing the same service for the same reasons doesn't soun unreasoanble to me.
 
Cities and counties have been doing this for decades, finding construction without permit. I don't like the idea of drones any more than anyone here, however, these overflights are legal without warrant. Even if we manage to get the FAA to restrict the drones, plane overflights will remain legal.
 
Last edited:
Very good point. How are you going to stop anybody in any sort of flying machine from looking down?
 
radcen said:
Sure they do, they're just sitting on the ground.
Click to expand...

No, that's a guy sitting in an air-conditioned room playing a video game. Not a pilot. Don't believe me? Ask him for his pilot's license!
 
Duece is correct. Those are operators, not pilots.
 
Sweeping the floor to get all the nits being picked... ;)

Back on topic, The only opposition to this seems knee jerk against being watched, even if everyone admits it is legal. things like this are already being done for a variety of reasons by a variety of governments from city all the way up to Federal. Around here for years night time overflights are done looking for pot grower hot spots in barns. I am not a big fan of a lot of the War on Drugs but the overflights are legal.

I think the Ranchers are being a bit whiny and stretching the truth to try and get Tea Party support against 'an overreaching unelected agency's unfunded mandates'. :roll:
 
clownboy said:
Duece is correct. Those are operators, not pilots.
Click to expand...
Drone Pilots
Click to expand...
: The Future Of Aerial Warfare


"The biggest training center of its kind in the United States, Holloman has become the primary training ground for
pilots who fly unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones."
Click to expand...

There, pilots learn to fly the MQ-1 Predator and the MQ-9 Reaper, two of the military's most important weapons systems. These remotely controlled planes can hover in the air 24 hours at a time, collecting intelligence or carrying out a strike in Afghanistan.


Drone Pilots: The Future Of Aerial Warfare : NPR
 
radcen said:
You're extrapolating the limits of the 4th Amendment beyond what they really say, and even mean. The skies belong to the government (read: public), not the individual property owners, and as such they are not violating any private property laws whatsoever. Just as the government also owns the public streets, and can sit there and use devices such as binoculars and cameras to observe as much as they can into private property, they can use the same concept with the public skies.

There is NOTHING in the 4th Amendment that limits law enforcement from investigating anything they want as long as they do it from a distance. Public areas are a distance. Warrants and the such are only necessary when they want to search the actual property itself.
Click to expand...


The 4th amendment is about needing to obtain a warrant before a search and seizure.Its irrelevant if your property is where they conduct the search on your property is or if they use some other property to conduct a search of your property.Flying a plane, helicopter, satellite or what ever over someone's property specifically in order to look for something is a search. Again the 4th amendment is not about privacy,so the fact they can see something is irrelevant from some other spot is irrelevant. It would be one thing if for example a helicopter was flying point A to point B and notice illegal activity was going on.However this is not the case with the EPA, they are deliberately flying over in order conduct a search without a warrant.
 
Deuce said:
No, that's a guy sitting in an air-conditioned room playing a video game. Not a pilot. Don't believe me? Ask him for his pilot's license!
Click to expand...
Piloting... operating... controlling... an aircraft that has the potential of crashing and killing people is a game to you? Wow. Just... wow.


clownboy said:
Duece is correct. Those are operators, not pilots.
Click to expand...
Synonyms. Semantics.


notquiteright said:
Sweeping the floor to get all the nits being picked... ;)
Click to expand...
No kidding.

Pilot - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

pi·lot
   [pahy-luht] Show IPA
noun
3. Aeronautics . a person duly qualified to operate an airplane, balloon, or other aircraft.

Note: Other definitions regarding other uses omitted for brevity. You can find them all at the above link.
Click to expand...
No mention of a license being necessary, though I'd bet that specific training and certification of some kind is still required. Regardless, the term is for the action, not the certification.
 
This is a bit off subject but I heard a report on drone pilots one day that went into how strange a job it is. One guy said he had killed 3 people that day then got off work and went to his kids baseball game. He said it made killing seem like a video game but he knew it was the real thing and it was very disconcerting to say the least.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
This is a bit off subject but I heard a report on drone pilots one day that went into how strange a job it is. One guy said he had killed 3 people that day then got off work and went to his kids baseball game. He said it made killing seem like a video game but he knew it was the real thing and it was very disconcerting to say the least.
Click to expand...
I can see where it would seem almost unreal. I have heard similar stories from bomber crews during WW2 and the Korean War.
 
radcen said:
I can see where it would seem almost unreal. I have heard similar stories from bomber crews during WW2 and the Korean War.
Click to expand...

True, I wouldn't really see alot of difference in high altitude bombing and piloting a drone when it comes to killing without seeing your enemy up close and personal, although those drone pilots get some pretty close up pics of whoever they put the cross hairs on.
 
How is this any different than the DEA doing fly overs looking for marijuana plots?

It isn't any different and the DEA has been doing it for decades.

How is this any different than the planes that fly over looking for wildfires?

It isn't any different and its been done for decades.

You don't own the airspace above your land. If you did, you could restrict jets from flying over your property. Law enforcement can look at your property from a public right of way without a search warrant. For example, if you had some tall pot plants growing in your backyard, the local law enforcement does not need a warrant to spot that from the sidewalk. Agricultural runoff is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, source of water pollution. You guys that always bash the EPA, you should go spend some time in a country that does not have strict environmental enforcement. Spend a few weeks in China for example. This EPA free paradise you are wanting is a total ****hole as a result of that.
 
Last edited:
SouthernDemocrat said:
How is this any different than the DEA doing fly overs looking for marijuana plots?

It isn't any different and the DEA has been doing it for decades.

How is this any different than the planes that fly over looking for wildfires?

It isn't any different and its been done for decades.

You don't own the airspace above your land. If you did, you could restrict jets from flying over your property. Law enforcement can look at your property from a public right of way without a search warrant. For example, if you had some tall pot plants growing in your backyard, the local law enforcement does not need a warrant to spot that from the sidewalk. Agricultural runoff is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, source of water pollution. You guys that always bash the EPA, you should go spend some time in a country that does not have strict environmental enforcement. Spend a few weeks in China for example. This EPA free paradise you are wanting is a total ****hole as a result of that.
Click to expand...
I got the impression from OP that these fly-overs were occurring at an increased rate.
 
I can't find any reference to frequency, just some ranchers don't want the overflights. They would rather be sent a questionnaire about runoff than have the EPA look for themselves.

I don't see the EPA running into legal trouble over this, would be interesting to know just who these ranchers are and do they have a past history of pollution...

or daytime orgies on the back deck... :shock:
 
This could be an interesting battle. How high does law enforcement need to be when they fly over your property? 10,000 feet? 1000 feet? 1foot? Clearly, a line must be drawn.

In this case, I think it is very easy for the EPA to monitor the water supply and then get a warrant to search suspected lands via air. It seems to me that the over flights for the sake of over flights is unnecessary.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I live in a remote cabin that must look like a good dope growing spot to the DEA. They hover over my house and garden area in the summer so close I can see their ****** faces. I give them both fingers and would love to point a gun at them but I don't like jails much. IMO, gov should have to have a warrent to search your property from the air weather it's searchig for pot or sewage lagoons or anything else.
Click to expand...

You need to get the tail number for the aircraft. It will start with N and be something like N123AB. Write that down, the estimated height and find the local FAA FSDO and report the flight as in violation of FAR 91.13 Careless and Reckless Operation. They may also be in violation for flying to close to an occupied building, because they didn't have the intention of landing.

Your local FSDO is probably http:\\Boise FSDO . That is the Boise field office. They probably won't do anything to the pilot, but if he starts getting letters of correction from the FAA he'll get the idea.
 
ksu_aviator said:
This could be an interesting battle. How high does law enforcement need to be when they fly over your property? 10,000 feet? 1000 feet? 1foot? Clearly, a line must be drawn.
Click to expand...
This is solely my opinion, but I would think that whatever the minimum elevation above ground that is allowed for private aircraft would be considered "public right-of-way" and thus allowable for this type of observation.

I seem to recall from many years ago that there is a minimum for private pilots, but I do not recall the details.
 
The form to report complaints to the FAA has the minimum altitudes on it-
congested area is 1,000' agl
populated area is 500' agl
sparsely pop is 500' agl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom