We don't need federal government to regulate hobbyists

Your June 5 article, "Suburban airport on alert after drone scares," seems to make the case that all hobbyists should be regulated by Congress, which is contrary to Section 336 of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act.

This law clearly prohibits the Federal Aviation Administration from promulgating "any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft" - but only if specific requirements are met. Importantly, this includes operating within the safety guidelines of a nationwide community-based organization, such as the Academy of Model Aeronautics.

Section 336, also known as the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, was intended to allow hobbyists to fly within CBO safety programing, essentially providing an alternative that is equitable - if not more rigid - than what the FAA offers to those who prefer not to operate within a CBO.

Congress did not intend to give hobbyists a free pass; rather Congress' intent with Section 336 was to leave risk mitigation and the development of appropriate safety guidelines to those who have the longest track record of safely managing hobbyists. The AMA was founded in 1936 - two decades before the FAA - and represents approximately 200,000 hobbyists across the country. Our members follow rigorous safety guidelines that are based on AMA's many decades of experience overseeing the model aircraft community. Our members know where, when, and how to fly safely. We've proven that the CBO model program works in managing this community.

Lastly, when it comes to the FAA's drone data, greater context is needed. AMA analyzed the data released by the FAA in February 2017, covering February-September 2016, and found that the vast majority of these reports were simple sightings. Of these sightings, many are of model aircraft and drones operating safely in the airspace and following appropriate safety guidelines.

Dave Mosquera

AMA member

West Chicago