Photographer arrested for flying over feedlot, taking pictures

EDIT: As others have pointed out below (and which I should have divined!), the arrest was AFTER the flight and, principally, because of trespassing with a parked vehicle on private property!

http://www.kansas.com …rrested-after-flying.html

Interesting story....

I think trespass might be the wrong charge because he wasn't actually on the farm land. Maybe causing a nuisance/disturbing the peace should be the charge if he was circling around scaring the cattle and posing a danger to the people there.

...I'm all for a photographers rights, but you have to be reasonable. The question I have, are the people at the ranch just being paranoid? ...that's what is sounds like when they start claiming the food supply could be damaged by chemicals...

...but, note that he was arrested for parking on the property which is trespassing and if there were signs asking him to report to the office and he didn't then...yes that would be trespassing.

So what about google satellites? At what altitude/height is it not considered trespassing?

Edit: reading the other article, it seems to indicate had he made a single pass over, he'd be ok, but because he was circling it was deemed illegal.

I would imagine the main crime was driving and parking on the ranch.

(emphasis added)

That's an excellent point. Empty unknown vehicle on the property is suspicious.

I would think this would go to the original trespass (the vehicle) and the reason for the flyover. It was clearly not as a transportation route, but for the purpose of taking pictures in an area clearly marked no trespassing. I think the photog was wrong on both accounts.

Better article: http://hutchnews.com …hic-photog-arrested-in-GC

koala yummies wrote in post #16109071
So what about google satellites? At what altitude/height is it not considered trespassing?

According to the comments in the article, Google has blurred out the feedlots on maps/earth.

While the article isn't clear (especially with the last paragraph being thrown in there), I think you guys are misinterpreting it...it's most likely that the trespassing charge is for driving onto the property, launching from it and leaving the vehicle there, not the actual flyover.

It's actually funny...the title of this thread is only one word off from the title of the article, but that's a very important word. The article says he was arrested *AFTER* flying over the property. Which is definitely correct, if a little misleading, as it implies (but does not explicitly state) that the flyover was the cause of the arrest, even though the cause of the arrest may have been the driving onto the property part of the business.

The thread title says he was arrested *FOR* flying over the property...which may not actually be correct.

Just the musings of a former reporter turned English teacher...don't mind me.

Tony-S wrote in post #16108814
http://www.kansas.com …rrested-after-flying.html

I guess even if you're not on the ground it's trespassing!

If you read the article you will note that they parked a truck on private property without permission and launched the paraglider from private property again without permission. Seems like trespassing to me.

Yeah, another senior moment on my part. I've edited the OP to reflect the parked vehicle and trespassing!