As the commercial drone industry eagerly awaits progress on long-anticipated FAA rule changes—particularly those that would expand beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) operations—a new piece of legislation has raised alarms across the sector.
Local Control Over Drone Operations
Introduced this month by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), the Drone Integration and Zoning Act (DIZA) proposes giving local, county, and tribal governments the authority to regulate drone flights below 200 feet in altitude. If passed, the bill would mark a significant shift away from the current national standard governed solely by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
At its core, DIZA would allow over 90,000 individual jurisdictions across the U.S. to establish their own rules for low-altitude drone activity. That includes the power to ban flights over private property without consent—effectively localizing the airspace in ways that could severely limit operational consistency and growth for drone businesses.
While local control may appeal to communities concerned about privacy or nuisance drones, industry leaders warn that such a fragmented framework would be difficult—if not impossible—for drone service providers to navigate.
Companies offering aerial photography, infrastructure inspection, agricultural surveying, and delivery services often operate across county or state lines. If every jurisdiction has its own permitting process or airspace restrictions, simply charting a legal flight path could become a logistical nightmare.
It’s especially concerning for firms preparing for the FAA’s upcoming BVLOS rule changes, which are expected to open the door to larger-scale drone operations. If DIZA passes, that progress could be stifled before it ever lifts off.
The bill appears to be a response to growing public anxiety around drone sightings, particularly those misidentified as surveillance threats. While some local officials have called for stronger enforcement options, critics argue that DIZA doesn't solve the real problem: a lack of situational awareness.
False reports of “suspicious drones” often turn out to be misidentified aircraft or benign commercial activity. Without reliable detection data, communities are forced to rely on guesswork—leading to confusion, unnecessary panic, and potentially restrictive policies.
As lawmakers look to address these concerns, it’s worth considering tools that offer clarity rather than chaos. Drone detection systems, like AirGuard, can provide real-time awareness of what’s in the sky—without the need for interference or jamming. While not a focal point of DIZA, detection technology could play a vital role in informing smarter, more balanced policies at every level of government.
This isn’t the first time Sen. Lee has introduced legislation like DIZA. Previous efforts to localize low-altitude drone regulation have failed to gain traction in Congress. Still, the bill’s reappearance reflects persistent friction between national oversight and local interests.
Whether it advances or not, DIZA has reignited an important conversation: how should we govern the increasingly crowded low-altitude airspace? The answer will shape not just the future of drone businesses, but also how communities adapt to the next era of aerial technology.