NAAA, always working to diversify and enhance the professionalism
of the aerial application industry, has been advocating drones for
aerial imaging while being skeptical about the limitations and issues related to their
making efficacious and targeted aerial applications due to their limited size,
speed and a dearth of data on their effectiveness. A recent article in Ohio’s
Country Journal detailed some of the same issues raised by NAAA.
The article was written by three professors with the
Department of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Ohio State
University. The article gives an overview of the current status of drone use in
agriculture and the historic and current use of drone spraying in Southeast
Asia and the use of the Yamaha RMAX in California.
The article then goes on to acknowledge that spraying with a
drone is different than spraying with either a ground rig or manned
agricultural aircraft. This is a key point NAAA has made to federal and
state regulatory agencies, highlighting that current labels don’t reflect this
difference. The authors also point out that drift is a concern from spraying with
drones. They mention that research is currently
being done to measure deposition, coverage and drift from drones and compare
drones with other application methods. They state “it is too soon to come to a
conclusion on effectiveness and drift potential of drone sprayers.”
They also conclude that the economics of using a drone for
applications will make it more likely they will be used for spot spraying
rather than larger-scale broadcast applications. Perhaps the most important
agreement with NAAA’s position on drone spraying is that the federal
regulations related to pesticide applications need to be updated to include
drones, and pesticides must be labeled appropriately for drone applications. In January of this year, NAAA submitted a letter to
EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler to urge the EPA to promptly evaluate UAS’
ability to make safe and precise and efficacious applications of pesticides.
