Friday, November 21, 2008 06:30 MST
Idaho Business Review
subscribeWANT THREE FREE ISSUES?
Daily EmailDaily e-mail updates
Real Estate EmailReal Estate e-mail updates
ADVERTISING? | CLASSIFIEDS | GOT A TIP? | TOP LIST | RETURN TO HOME RSS 2.0 CONTACT US at 208.336.3768
SEARCH ARCHIVES
See stories on: Idaho Companies Idaho Industries Idaho People

Newspaper Story

Farmer uses unmanned eye in the sky to maximize crops

POSTED: Monday, June 23, 2008

by Zach Hagadone

Article Tools
Printer friendly edition Printer-friendly
E-mail this to a friend E-mail this
RSS Feed RSS feed
Digg this story Digg It!
Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us

On a daily basis farmers contend with a slate of variables. From irrigation and fertilization rates, to animal and insect behavior, to soil composition and the weather, farming is historically one of the least exact sciences.

But one Kendrick, Idaho, farmer is leading the effort to revolutionize agricultural data collection. Using Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), Robert Blair, who owns PineCreek Precision, has been able to map, monitor and analyze his fields with a precision often reserved only for military intelligence gathering or law enforcement.
“I would equate UAS with the missing piece of the precision ag puzzle,” he said. “Currently images can be obtained by satellite or regular aircraft – the downside to both of these is timeliness. A satellite can’t collect images if there is cloud cover and the resolution is less than a UAS.”
The UAS used by Blair is called the CropCam, and it looks like a model airplane – with an 8-foot wingspan and 4-feet length, it’s battery-powered, weighs 6 pounds and can fly at altitude between 400 and 2,000 feet at a max speed of 60 mph. It can be pre-programmed to fly a specific route on autopilot or under manual control, and is capable of covering more than 640 acres in about 25 minutes.
The difference is that this “model airplane” is equipped with a high resolution camera (about 0.5 inches per pixel), and beams the information directly to Blair’s computer for analysis.
The pictures he’s taken have enabled him to track elk herd damage to his garbanzo and pea fields and, using color spectrum overlays, pinpoint exactly which areas need more or less water or fertilizer. Having such detailed and timely data enabled him to more efficiently manage his crops, saving over $50,000 last year, he said.
“It’s allowed me to ask the question: ‘What’s going on here?’” he said.
That’s also a question he’s asked the Federal Aviation Administration, challenging regulations he says are barriers to increased use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in the agricultural and natural resource management industries.
“The FAA has had 40 years – and we’ll even give them the benefit of the doubt, 10 to 15 years – to make regulations for UAV use,” he said. “They’ve had more than enough time to have made rules for commercial use.”
Pointing to Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries – which has been using UAV’s for chemical application since the 1990s – and worries over global food shortages, he says the time is right to aggressively pursue expanded UAS use.
“Here’s the United States, leader in technology, falling behind again,” he said.
Currently, the FAA requires civilian, commercial UAS operators to obtain a Certificate of Authorization for public use, a pilot’s license with an instrument rating and a tail number for the vehicle. Because of the addition of an autopilot feature, operators must also get an Airworthiness Certification.
Meanwhile, model airplane hobbyists are guided by a short advisory circular that basically asks operators to use good judgment, keeping their aircraft within sight and below a certain altitude.
“They are flying on a one-page set of rules,” he said.
What Blair wants is an exemption to the regulations for natural resource management (in which he includes agriculture, mining, forestry and wildlife uses), and new UAS regulations that more closely match the regs governing model airplanes.
In a petition he sent to the FAA last month, Blair outlined a set of 14 guidelines he says are in line with what the agency is reviewing and would open the doors to greater use around the country.
Among other topics, the guidelines include prohibitions against flying UAVs over heavily populated areas, the institution of a course of training less rigorous than earning a pilot’s license, the creation of a non-profit organization to administer training and serve as a link between the industry and the FAA, a ceiling height of 1,500 feet, a weight limit of 50 pounds and airworthiness rules similar to those used for model airplanes.
He’s also managed to acquire some allies in Washington. With help from Congressman Bill Sali, R-Idaho, Blair prompted several members of Congress to sign and submit a letter to the FAA, asking them to include representatives from natural resource management industries on the agency’s rulemaking advisory committee, which met for a first time in May. The committee is working on new regulations for UASs.
“This is something that is extremely important to Idaho agriculture and has the potential to pay off in a big way,” said Wayne Hoffmann, Sali’s spokesman. “Just the idea that you can fly a UAS and know specifically how much water and how much chemical to use is a powerful money-saving tool.”
The letter was also signed by Sens. Mike Crapo, Larry Craig, Gordon Smith, R-Ore., and Reps. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, Doc Hastings, R-Wash., Nancy Boyda, D-Kan., Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., Solomon Ortiz, D- Texas, and Ellen Tausher, D-Calif.
Results of the advisory committee’s meeting were mostly organizational, and Mike Fergus, FAA spokesman for the Northwest Mountain Region, said the process has only just begun.
“It has been known that some rulemaking processes across the U.S. have taken as long as 18 to 24 months and sometimes longer, all dependent on the high visibility and level of interest [in the regulations],” he said.
Fergus added that a response to Sali has been drafted, but wouldn’t comment on its contents for the record. The document will likely be delivered to the congressman’s office by the end of the month.
Dr. Tom Curtin, chief knowledge office of Virginia-based Association for Unmanned Vehicles Systems International (AVUSI), said his organization does have a seat at the table, and hopes the committee will eventually hand down a set of regulations that benefit operators like Blair.
“[AVUSI wants] sensible rules that are going to allow unmanned aircraft to be integrated into the national airspace,” he said. “And sensible to me means starting with the easy stuff… stuff likes agriculture, forest fire stuff, border control.”

3 Comments

  1. Great story, Zach - I've seen UAVs in action over at INL** (& I only saw what they were allowed to show). This is definitely a nice step forward in precision farming. UAV technology is accelerating & who knows what new uses that people will find for them!

    ** You might ping Tom Harrison at INL on this.

    Comment By Norris Krueger
    Monday, June 23, 2008 @ 2:06 PM

  2. How does this technology benefit consumers? Lower food costs in any way? Decrease fuel use? Fertilizer? And, is there some potential impact on food safety that might result?

    And, on the opposite side of the coin what are the potential downsides from use of this technology, if any?

    Seems like lots of 4-H & FFA kids who are good on video games could be trained to operate these things? Not a bad summer job...

    Comment By Warren E. Clark + CCI Marketing +1 847 836 5100
    Monday, June 23, 2008 @ 7:12 PM

  3. Amen. Also applies to remotely piloted airships (DoD originally excluded blimps from the UAV definition). Blimps are slower than most RC models, and normally fly less than 300 feet above the ground, under the operators constant visual control. They're also pending bureaucratic approval, now that the FAA has decided to do something about certifing fixed and rotary wing UAVs.

    Blimps never crash, and in the event of CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain), rarely damage expensive on-board goodies. Their greatest disadvantage is that most pilots have never seen one, and none of the aerospace engineering schools have even a single course on AEROSTATION (the science of buoyant flight).

    Type certification (prerequisite to assigning tail numbers)is problematic but has already driven most RC blimp operators out of business.

    A Canadian friend, one of the few remaining manufacturers and operators, is in his second month of a 90 day tour through the prairie provinces.

    Based on close cooperation with the Transport Ministry, he no longer needs daily flight approvals, they issue three day NOTAMS for each village on his itinerary. He has developed an evasion drill,to protect his blimp from curious aviators.

    Even the dullest student pilot should be able to see and avoid a ten foot diameter, thirty foot long low flyer.

    There are no records on a bird strike on an airship since the first flight in the 1850s.

    Lots of photos on his sponsor's site:

    www.HorizonBlimpTour.ca

    Pray for sanity,

    Al Robbins

    CDR (USNR, Retired)

    Comment By Albert Robbins
    Wednesday, June 25, 2008 @ 2:51 PM

Leave a comment
Leave this field empty

Name:

Email:


You have characters left.

Commenters, let's maintain a civil discussion here. Please observe the following guidelines:

  1. Do not use profanity or euphemisms for profanity.
  2. Do not personally attack or bait other commenters.
  3. Express your own views; don't just argue for argument's sake.
  4. Sarcasm doesn't work on the Web. Either avoid it or clearly label it so you aren't misinterpreted.
  5. Don't make the same point repetitively.
  6. No spam. Link to a commercial site only if it's relevant to the discussion.
  7. Putting your name on your comments increases their value and credibility. However, if you must conceal your identity, please choose one pseudonym and stick to it. No "sock puppets."