Photo

I have relied upon an aerial drone for photography and video, for both real-state assignments and publishing projects. Other folks use aerial drones for agriculture, structural (e.g. bridges) assessment, search & rescue, etc.
The dominant provider of commercial and recreational drones has been DJI (a Chinese company) and any alternative providers do not provide the same value at similar price points. Furthermore, we’ve seen multiple companies introducing new applications for aerial drones, including deliveries and transportation.

In the United States, existing uses of aerial drones have faced some disruption in 2025.
(a) Imports of some DJI products have been blocked by US Customs & border protection
(b) Tariffs on imports (notably imports from China)
(c) Pending ban on drones made in specific countries (e.g. China, which includes DJI, Autel Robotics, and others)

The reasons for (a) are muddled but seems a combination of factual bad actors (dating back to 2019) and distrust of specific foreign governments (e.g. China).
The import problem is not directly related to tariffs.

As for (c), the drone ban, this stems from legislation passed by Congress in 2024, which requires the United States government to somehow demonstrate that foreign drones (particularly DJI) are either a threat or not; and if the government fails to do so, then the answer will be assumed to be “threat.” As of October 1, 2025, the government has failed to act or chosen to not act.

If the ban goes into effect (end of this year), there can be several possible consequences.

1. Imports from specific manufacturers, notably DJI, will be prohibited
2. Manufacturers such as DJI cannot provide warranty support (including DJI Care) for previously sold products
3. Unclear if existing drones might be grounded, which would impact hundreds of thousands of businesses including agriculture and law enforcement.
4. Unclear if the ban might include both commercial uses and recreational uses

Upon reading House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 5009 (Dec.7,2024)

• * The Secretary of Defense shall fully disassemble a drone aircraft made by DJI or a similar … in order to create a taxonomy for each component
• * Secretary of Defense shall submit … a report

Possibly the Dept. of Defense has begun this effort, but no one has reported any hint that might be true.
The primary concerns are:

1. Specifically, military uses (and perhaps civil authority uses) must not rely upon (untrusted) foreign sources.
2. For any drone/sUAS, increase resiliency of supply chain using parts supplied by domestic sources.
   This is anticipating that aerial drones will increase (deliveries, transportation, etc.) and the technology supply chain need be secure.
3. In particular, the Chinese government reserves the right to seize any information they want from private companies (including DJI and Autel), which gives rise to general concerns of spying, though no one can identify any specific seizure that might pose a threat to the United States.

Today, there is no American drone manufacturer value and price comparable to the market leader, DJI. (Autel Robotics was a potential contender but is also a China-based company and has been greatly hindered since the U.S. government included the company on their list of concerns.)
largely, legitimate commercial drone use has no alternative to DJI. This may suggest a slow transition (not hard cut-off ban) as American companies step up. At the end of 2025, what exactly will happen remains uncertain and remains a concern for numerous commercial uses. In the meantime, several companies have emerged that sell DJI drone clones, presumably licensed by DJI as they are attempting to work around the impeding ban.

What I want: To create awe-inspiring photo, preferably unlike the images other people have created of the same subject.

Equipped with a guide book that helps to locate known waterfalls, I was surprised to discover that the access road was marked: No tresspassing for any reason. However, while the dirt road was apparently verboten, there seemed to be no prohibition to approaching the river a bit further downstream and then walking upstream. Walking upstream seems a simple proposition, but more often is difficult or impossible. On this day, I found my way, but did step upon a dirt road that may have been private property. I did not linger, but simply moved quickly away.

Arriving at the falls, I found concrete, ropes and a step ladder; not exactly the pristine wilderness that I had hoped for. Furthermore, access to the falls was limited to a single rocky ledge with very few options for camera shooting angle. Without risking gross tresspassing and without risking my life climbing down the cliff, I resigned myself to creating a rather documentary photograph and not spending extended time at this location.

A week later, I had three days in the Port Angeles area just outside Olympic National Park. The popular attraction here is the road to Hurricane Ridge, attaining an elevation of 5200 feet. The season being mid springtime, I anticipated a view of the Olympic mountains with snow-capped peaks. But clouds dominated the skies for the entire duration of my 3-days. From dawn til dusk, the great view of the mountains never materialized.

As the song says: You can’t always get what you want … but you might get what you need.
Setting aside what I want, what do I need?

A walk outside with sod under foot and an eye toward the weather.
My camera equipment must function
A documentary photo, not perfect
Survive the exploration without injury (slipping on a wet rock, or worse)

So, during my trip, it happened more than once. I did not get what I wanted … but I did get what I needed.