Key Takeaways:
-
The Weber County Sheriff Search and Rescue team emphasizes the lifesaving role of drones in emergency operations, particularly in unpredictable weather conditions.
-
Proposed legislation, HR 2864—the “Countering CCP Drones Act”—could hinder the use of essential drone technologies critical for search and rescue missions.
-
The bill aims to restrict the use of drones from certain manufacturers, notably DJI, based on concerns of national security, which some experts argue are unfounded.
- There is a potential economic impact, affecting numerous small businesses and the drone industry as a whole.
Drones: The Lifesaving Technology Facing Legislative Challenges in Utah
As spring descends upon the rugged mountains of Utah, the weather can shift from sunny warmth to chilling downpours and freezing nights in the blink of an eye. It is within this unpredictable environment that teams like the Weber County Sheriff Search and Rescue are called upon to locate lost individuals and save lives. Drones have become pivotal in these operations, offering rapid and precise search capabilities—even in low visibility conditions, utilizing advanced thermal imagery.
In the face of overchurning weather and treacherous terrain, the Weber County team has recognized the importance of drones for ensuring public safety. Capt. Kyle Nordfors, a seasoned professional with extensive experience in aviation and a long-time volunteer for the search and rescue unit, emphasizes that the success of these operations relies heavily on the reliability and adaptability of drone technology.
However, a looming piece of legislation called HR 2864, the “Countering CCP Drones Act,” threatens to disrupt the very tools that contribute to these crucial missions. The proposed law seeks to add DJI, a prominent drone manufacturer, to a “Covered List.” If enacted, this move would bar the Federal Communications Commission from approving new equipment authorizations for DJI’s hardware and software, based on growing concerns over national security linked to foreign-based technology.
Critics argue that this approach is overly aggressive and lacks substantial justification. Multiple independent studies have established the safety and reliability of DJI drones, indicating that the perceived threats to national security may not hold water upon close inspection. The sentiments expressed by those within the first responder community highlight the immediate impact such limitations could have; lives could be lost if access to advanced drone technology becomes restricted.
These concerns are further compounded by the economic considerations of the bill. The drone industry, especially small businesses that rely on drone operations for various purposes, could face significant hurdles. The new regulations could enable the FCC to revoke existing drone equipment authorizations, grounding drones that citizens have already purchased for personal use, filmmaking, or public safety initiatives. The impact of switching to domestically manufactured drones, which are typically more expensive and less sophisticated, could jeopardize the viability of many of these small operations.
Moreover, the narrative surrounding national security overlooks the broader context of economic interdependence. Many essential items in the American market, from smartphones to computers, originate from various countries, including China. Pinpointing drones as a particular security threat may overlook the larger interconnectedness of global trade.
The conversation around HR 2864 reflects deeper societal tensions, reminiscent of nationalistic sentiments that have surfaced periodically in American history. The efforts to legislate competition out of existence are viewed by some as a misguided response to fears that may not be fully substantiated. As Capt. Nordfors aptly points out, when proactive measures for safety become entangled with legislative agendas, the potential for missed opportunities in saving lives grows.
As public safety and technological advancement remain at the forefront of discussions surrounding this proposed legislation, it is vital to consider the implications on both individual lives and the broader technological landscape. The narrative is as much about protecting citizens as it is about fostering a thriving drone industry that can meet the increasing demands for aerial support in crisis situations. The most pressing question remains whether the solutions proposed will indeed enhance security or risk endangering lives in the pursuit of perceived safety.
Capt. Kyle Nordfors is a 25-year veteran of the aviation industry, a dedicated volunteer for the Weber County, Utah, Sheriff Search and Rescue team, and serves as UAS chairman for the Mountain Rescue Association. The views expressed in this article are those of the author.
This article originally appeared on RealClear Defense.
