# Law-Enforcement Drone and UAS Programs Small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS, "drones") operated by Arkansas law-enforcement agencies. Unlike [[Automatic License Plate Reader (ALPR)]] cameras, drones are **episodic and mobile**: they generate no persistent location footprint, but they produce a flight log, and a flight log is a location record of where an agency chose to deploy aerial surveillance and when. The corpus documents ten agency programs. What distinguishes them analytically is not only the hardware, but the record each agency produced: native logs with and without coordinates, narrative descriptions, procurement and training traces, model-specific purchase records, a DFR policy reference without its SOG, and a full operational policy paired with a log. ## How it appears in the corpus | Agency | Platform | Evidentiary basis | Volume documented | Location posture | |---|---|---|---|---| | [[Faulkner County Sheriff's Office]] | [[Skydio]] X10 (`X10E SR47P`) | Native flight log + FAA credentials | **155 flights**, 2 airframes, ~31.7 flight-hours, 2024-10-01 → 2026-07-03 | **Full addresses and GPS, released unredacted** | | [[Russellville Police Department]] | [[DroneSense]]; two [[DJI]] Mavic 2 Enterprise Advanced and one Mavic 3 Thermal current aircraft | Paired session/coordinate exports + Policy 421.2 | **724 session rows; 719 dated joins**, 2023-11-28 → 2026-07-20 | **Latitude/longitude takeoff points for 719 dated events** | | [[Little Rock Police Department]] | Make/model not stated in the record | Internal training email, 2026-05-01 | Not quantified | No log produced | | [[Conway Police Department]] | [[Skydio]] | Asset-forfeiture ledger + Flock kickoff deck | Not quantified | No log produced | | [[Benton County Sheriff's Office]] | Not stated | Narrative FOIA response | "ad hoc" deployment | No log produced | | [[Rogers Police Department]] | [[Skydio]] X10 + dock | Policy 406.7, signed Axon quote, KMZ sites, CAD-to-call message | Three current and three proposed DFR sites | **Six exact current/proposed infrastructure coordinates; no flight log produced** | | [[Saline County Sheriff's Office]] | [[DJI]] Mavic Enterprise 2, Mavic Enterprise 2 Advance, and Avata 2 ×2 | Four-aircraft inventory + Policy 5.25 + two-page flight log | Four inventory rows; deployments from 2026-01-06 → 2026-07-21 | Produced location text, no latitude/longitude field | | [[Hot Springs Police Department]] | [[Skydio]] X2E and X10 | Executed orders, City purchase orders, cooperative-procurement file | Three X2E kits purchased 2022; one X10 system purchased 2024; unsigned three-license proposal in 2025 | No asset register or flight log produced | | [[Craighead County Sheriff's Office]] | [[BRINC]] Lemur 2 Safeguard | One-row aerial/portable-camera inventory | One device and serial; inventory undated | No flight or deployment log produced | | [[Van Buren Police Department]] | Make/model not stated | Policy 6.06 | Program authorized; deployment volume not produced | Required UAV Use Form includes date, time, weather, duration, operator, observer, reason, and synopsis; no forms produced | ### Saline County: the first produced operational UAV policy Saline County Policy 5.25, implemented 2022-01-01, is the corpus's first produced operational drone/UAS policy. It places the program under a Captain, seeks at least four qualified pilots, requires FAA Part 107 credentials, and authorizes supervisor-requested deployments for SRT incidents, fleeing and missing people, surveillance, and incident/disaster documentation. It also permits approved mutual aid for outside agencies, requires preflight mission planning, limits ordinary flight to 400 feet AGL, directs pilots to avoid inadvertent capture of areas carrying reasonable privacy expectations, and requires flight logging plus media transfer and incident reporting ([[Saline County Camera Policies UAV Log and Audit Printouts]], `Questions #4 & #5.pdf`, pp. 15-21). The accompanying paper log documents deployments from 2026-01-06 through 2026-07-21 across patrol, SWAT, outside-agency assistance, surveillance, search and rescue, event overwatch, and county-building inspection. It supplies produced location text but no coordinate field and therefore adds no point to [[Arkansas Camera Map Data]] (`Questions #4 & #5.pdf`, pp. 22-23). The same-day supplement supplies the manufacturer/model layer the log lacked: `UAV Inventory.pdf` lists one DJI `Mavic Enterprise 2` assigned to Civil/Warrants (2020), one `Mavic Enterprise 2 Advance` assigned as the on-call drone (2021), and two `Avata 2` units assigned to SWAT functions (2025 and 2026) ([[Saline County UAV Inventory]], p. 1). The inventory does not crosswalk those rows to the flight log's airframe labels, so it does not establish which aircraft flew any particular mission. ### Hot Springs: model-specific procurement without an operations record Hot Springs supplies the corpus's clearest multi-generation Skydio procurement trail. Its 2022 executed order and City purchase order establish **three color/thermal X2E Starter Kits** for **$47,842.74** ([[Hot Springs Skydio X2E RFP Order and Purchase]], `TERM AND CONDITIONS.pdf`, pp. 12-15). In 2024, the City used Texas DIR contract `DIR-CPO-4768` and reseller [[Granite Defense Technologies]] to buy **one X10** with thermal, low-light, 5G, audio, storage, fleet-management, and multi-viewer streaming components for **$32,875.68** ([[Hot Springs Skydio Cooperative Procurement and X10 Purchase]], `INTERSTATE COOPERATION CONTRACT.pdf`, pp. 4-17). A 2025 proposal would have added three 15-month X2E Autonomy/Cloud Enterprise license sets for $12,144.60, but its signature and date fields are blank (same source, pp. 18-21). The production contains no airframe serials, asset register, policy, flight log, deployment authorizations, locations, maintenance, replacements, or disposition history. It therefore proves acquisitions and contemplated software without establishing how, where, or how often HSPD flew the systems. ### Rogers: the first Drone First Responder program Rogers PD's Policy 406.7 establishes a **DFR Chief Pilot**, "a sworn (or civilian) RTIC Member," responsible for "Overall upkeep of the DFR program and equipment," training of "RTIC/DFR personnel," regulatory compliance, and "effective and efficient day to day DFR operations." The policy treats drones as one of three co-equal real-time sensor streams, describing information "initially detected through RTIC unique sources (PSCN/ DFR/ALPR)." This is the corpus's first documented DFR program, and it changes the picture the rest of this page describes. The other documented operational postures are principally episodic: a pilot flies a drone to a call. A DFR program launches from the crime center as a dispatch response, which makes the drone a standing sensor rather than a deployed tool. The July 24 delivery did not include the referenced **SOG 417.2 Drone First Responder Program**. The later communications production contains SOG 417.2 working drafts, unnumbered drafts, and 401.11 draft/non-draft files. The non-draft 401.11 copy is approved October 28, 2025 but has a blank effective date, leaving the operative version unresolved ([[T057 - Rogers DFR Policy Version and Effective Date]]). The same production supplies three current `X10 + Dock` placemarks, three proposed DFR placemarks, and a June 5 statement that CAD-to-Skydio integration was complete and could “fly directly to a call” ([[Rogers DFR and Dedrone Deployment]]). It supplies no flight log or complete airframe inventory. Note the negative boundary this resolves. Benton County SO expressly stated its drones "are not part of a Drone as First Responder auto-launch system," and the DFR marketing reaching LRPD inboxes had no documented Arkansas deployment behind it ([[Flock Alpha and DJI Dock 3]]). Rogers supplies the deployment. ### The location postures This is the load-bearing pattern. Two agencies produced a native flight log in the same week, against comparably worded requests: - **Faulkner County released everything.** The `flights SkydioX10.csv` export carries takeoff address, latitude, and longitude per flight, unredacted ([[FCSO Skydio X10 Flight Log]]). Many rows geolocate deployments to residential-grade street addresses. - **Russellville completed its first non-spatial export with a coordinate-bearing companion.** The first DroneSense PDF carries flight codes, dates, times, durations, pilot surnames, and mission labels. The supplement repeats the flight IDs with model and latitude/longitude, producing 719 dated takeoff joins across 715 exact coordinate strings. It does not supply full track geometry or incident narratives ([[Russellville Drone Inventory Policy and Flight Coordinates]]). - **Benton County described its program instead of logging it**, stating that its drones are deployed ad hoc, are not connected to ALPR or cloud programs, and are not part of a DFR auto-launch system ([[Benton County SO Camera Locations and System Status]]). - **Saline County released a scanned operational log with location text but no coordinates.** Its record is richer than a narrative response and poorer than a native platform export: missions, results, dates, durations, airframe labels, and location text are visible, but there is no latitude/longitude or native schema ([[Saline County Camera Policies UAV Log and Audit Printouts]], pp. 22-23). - **Hot Springs released procurement without operations.** The X2E/X10 files identify purchased hardware and software capabilities but contain no log, location, deployment, asset-status, or authorization record ([[hot-springs-pd/2026-07-27-26-917-supplement/_overview|Hot Springs PD 26-917 Supplemental Production]]). - **Craighead County released one inventory row without operations.** The record identifies a BRINC Lemur 2 Safeguard and equipment serial but supplies no purchase, assignment, registration, policy, flight, deployment, maintenance, or disposition history ([[Craighead County BRINC Lemur 2 Inventory]], `CCSO Drone.pdf`, p. 1). - **Rogers released fixed DFR infrastructure without a flight log.** Its KMZ files carry three current and three proposed exact dock/site points; communications establish dispatch integration, while the archive does not enumerate flights or missions ([[Rogers DFR and Dedrone Deployment]]). The divergence is a disclosure-practice finding, not a capability finding: the production sets do not establish the full records retained by each platform or agency. ### Mapping treatment FCSO's 141 GPS-bearing rows and Russellville's 719 dated coordinate joins appear in [[Arkansas Camera Map Data]] under the separate evidence stage `Drone flight takeoff (logged)`. They are dated deployment events, not installations: FCSO contributes 141 rows and Russellville 719, for 860 drone-stage records. Rogers adds six **fixed DFR infrastructure** records instead: three `Current inventory` and three `Proposal / revised proposal` points. Saline County adds no point because its paper log supplies location text but no coordinates; Hot Springs adds none because its production contains procurement records rather than a flight or deployment log. ### Convergence with the ALPR function At LRPD the drone unit is not organizationally separate from the ALPR program. The sUAS unit is run out of the **Technology & Equipment Unit** by Lt. [[Courtney Bewley]], who elsewhere in the same production appears as a Flock hot-list "Alert Owner" ([[LRPD sUAS Drone Unit]]). One unit and one lieutenant hold both the plate-reader footprint and the aerial one. Funding converges as well: Conway's drone package was bought with forfeiture money — `7/25/2024 — Drone package from Skydio — -$57,962.71` in the City Finance asset-forfeiture ledger ([[Conway Asset Forfeiture Log 2023-2026]]) — the same stream documented in [[Asset-Forfeiture Funding for Surveillance Procurement]]. A January 2025 Flock kickoff deck records Conway's stated goal as "Skydio 3, grant to purchase 2 more drones will be Skydio." ### Credentialing, where it is documented Only Faulkner County produced airworthiness and pilot paperwork: an FAA UAS Remote Pilot Certificate (number `5059508`, issued 13 Sep 2024, eighteen days before the flight log's first entry) and an aircraft registration (`FA3A4P4HWT`, issued 10/29/2024, expires 10/29/2027) whose Remote ID serial matches the log's primary airframe `sx76` ([[FCSO Drone Email and Specs]]). **No registration was produced for the second airframe**, which flew 23 of the 155 logged flights. LRPD documents its own pilot pipeline through quarterly training, named instructors, and a "SALT school" qualification pathway, without identifying aircraft. ## Current legal framework Arkansas Act 597 of 2025 addresses UAS image-capture offenses, defenses, civil remedies, and enumerated lawful government uses; it does not impose a warrant requirement on every flight. Government operators may use Part 107 or the public-aircraft certificate-of-authorization pathway, and Remote ID rules generally apply to registered or registration-required public-safety aircraft. The absence of an authorization, waiver, registration, or Remote ID record from a production is a proof gap, not proof of noncompliance. (primary public record, [Arkansas Act 597 of 2025](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/arkleg.state.ar.us/arkansas-act-597-of-2025.md)); (primary public record, [FAA Public Safety Drone Programs](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/faa.gov/public-safety-drone-programs.md)); (primary public record, [FAA Part 107](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/faa.gov/small-uas-regulations-part-107.md)); (primary public record, [FAA Remote ID](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/faa.gov/remote-identification-of-drones.md)) The Fourth Amendment analysis is mission-specific. Traditional aircraft cases involving naked-eye observations from lawful, noninterfering public airspace do not settle persistent low-altitude drones or enhanced sensors, and *Kyllo* protects against sense-enhancing technology that reveals otherwise unavailable details of the home. See [[Arkansas Law-Enforcement Drone Authority]] for the proposition-by-proposition case map. ## Stakeholders - **Operating agencies** — [[Faulkner County Sheriff's Office]], [[Russellville Police Department]], [[Little Rock Police Department]], [[Conway Police Department]], [[Benton County Sheriff's Office]], [[Rogers Police Department]], [[Saline County Sheriff's Office]], [[Hot Springs Police Department]], and [[Craighead County Sheriff's Office]]. - **Vendors** — [[Skydio]] (records at three agencies, model-specific at two), [[DroneSense]] (operations platform at one), [[Granite Defense Technologies]] (Hot Springs X10 reseller), [[DJI]] (four aircraft in Saline County's Tier-1 inventory), [[BRINC]] (one Craighead County Lemur 2), and [[Flock Safety, Inc.]] as marketed DFR/Dock context without a corpus-documented Arkansas Flock Alpha or DJI Dock 3 deployment (see [[Flock Alpha and DJI Dock 3]]). - **Named personnel** — [[Courtney Bewley]] and [[James Phillips]] (LRPD unit leadership), [[Chad Wooley]] (FCSO), [[Rodney Wright]] (issuing authority for Saline County Policy 5.25), and [[Bill Burrough]], [[Karen Scott]], and [[Tia McGraw]] in the Hot Springs procurement chain. ## Timeline - **2018-01-24** — Van Buren implements Policy 6.06, the earliest produced operational UAV policy in this corpus. - **2021-11-01** — Russellville implements UAS Policy 421.2. - **2022-01-01** — Saline County implements Policy 5.25. - **2022-04-29** — Hot Springs issues a $47,842.74 purchase order for three Skydio X2E kits. - **2023-11-28** — earliest dated flight in the completed Russellville DroneSense join, predating the department's Flock network by over a year. - **2024-07-25** — Conway's `-$57,962.71` Skydio drone package posts to the asset-forfeiture ledger. - **2024-09-13** — FCSO pilot's FAA remote-pilot certificate issued. - **2024-10-01** — first flight in FCSO's Skydio X10 log. - **2024-10-29** — FCSO airframe `sx76` registered with the FAA. - **2024-12-06** — Hot Springs issues a $32,875.68 cooperative-contract purchase order for one Skydio X10 system. - **2025-03-03** — Skydio prepares Hot Springs's unsigned $12,144.60 three-license X2E software proposal. - **2026-05-01** — LRPD distributes "Required Reading- sUAS Quarterly Training and some updates" to its drone pilots. - **2026-07-03 / 2026-07-20** — last logged flights at FCSO and Russellville respectively. - **2026-07-24** — both native flight logs enter the corpus; drone takeoff coordinates become mapping content. - **2026-07-27** — Saline County's policy and scanned 2026 flight log enter the corpus. - **2026-07-27** — Saline County's supplement identifies four DJI aircraft purchased from 2020 through 2026; the inventory is not crosswalked to the flight log. - **2026-07-27** — Hot Springs's X2E/X10 procurement supplement enters the corpus without a flight log or policy. - **2026-07-28** — Russellville supplies its current three-aircraft DJI dashboard, Policy 421.2, and the coordinate companion that yields 719 dated takeoff joins. - **2026-08-03** — Craighead County produces a one-row BRINC Lemur 2 Safeguard inventory without a flight or deployment log. - **2026-08-04** — Van Buren produces Policy 6.06, which requires advance mission approval, an observer, privacy safeguards, and a UAV Use Form after every deployment, but no inventory or use forms. - **2026-08-06** — Van Buren produces a Yuneec Typhoon asset sheet showing 2018 acquisition and a 2024 administrative-closet assignment; Bryant reports four drone/UAS units without serial-level inventory. ## Notes **Russellville, Saline County, and Van Buren supply clearly effective operational policies.** Van Buren Policy 6.06 was implemented 2018-01-24, making it the earliest produced operational UAV policy in this corpus; Russellville Policy 421.2 followed on 2021-11-01 and Saline County Policy 5.25 on 2022-01-01. Van Buren requires advance mission approval, an observer, and an after-action use form but supplies no inventory or forms. The policy gap remains at several other programs: FCSO produced no drone policy, LRPD supplies training material rather than operating rules, Rogers supplies competing DFR drafts and an approved 401.11 copy with no effective date, and Hot Springs supplies procurement records rather than a policy. The two native platform logs remain differently structured. Russellville now supplies coordinates but only four administrative mission categories and no case number or narrative; FCSO's log is coordinate-rich but also lacks a developed authorization field. Saline County's scanned log is the inverse: it provides narrative mission/result fields and occasional case references but no native schema or coordinates. Whether the agencies retain separate per-flight approval or incident records remains an open records question. FCSO's log places takeoffs in thirteen municipalities, including North Little Rock, Searcy, and Pine Bluff — **outside Faulkner County**. The produced records do not state the legal basis (mutual aid, task force, or training) for out-of-county operation. Van Buren's later asset sheet now identifies one Yuneec Typhoon acquired in 2018 and assigned to an administrative closet in 2024, but still supplies no flight/use forms or operational history ([[Van Buren Yuneec Typhoon Drone Asset]]). Bryant's narrative response reports four drone/UAS units without models, serials, flight logs, or coordinates ([[Bryant Public Safety Camera Policy and Inventory Response]]). ## Current-law authority crosswalk The 2026-08-10 legal audit uses these authorities only for the bounded propositions stated below: - (primary public record, [California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986)](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/govinfo.gov/california-v-ciraolo-476-u-s-207-1986.md)) — Naked-eye observation of curtilage from lawful public airspace at 1,000 feet was not a search on the facts presented. Does not decide lower-altitude drones, persistent observation, interference, or enhanced sensors. - (primary public record, [Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989)](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/govinfo.gov/florida-v-riley-488-u-s-445-1989.md)) — Helicopter observation from 400 feet was not a search under the controlling narrowest rationale tied to lawful, noninterfering, sufficiently common public use. O'Connor's concurrence supplies the narrowest controlling rationale; the plurality is not converted into a universal drone rule. - (web research 2026-08-10, [Izzard v. State, 663 S.W.2d 192 (Ark. Ct. App. 1984)](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/app.midpage.ai/izzard-v-state-663-s-w-2d-192-ark-ct-app-1984.md)) — Observation of an open field from an aircraft at about 100 feet did not violate a reasonable expectation of privacy on the particular facts. Does not resolve intentional low-altitude observation of home curtilage, sensors, or state-constitutional protection. - (primary public record, [Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001)](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/govinfo.gov/kyllo-v-united-states-533-u-s-27-2001.md)) — Sense-enhancing technology not in general public use that reveals details of the home otherwise unavailable without physical intrusion is a search. Does not make every drone, ordinary camera, or public observation a search. - (primary public record, [Long Lake Township V Todd Maxon, 513 Mich. 101 (Mich. 2024)](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/courts.michigan.gov/long-lake-township-v-todd-maxon-513-mich-101-mich-2024.md)) — The court did not decide whether drone surveillance was a Fourth Amendment search; it decided suppression was unavailable in the prospective civil zoning proceeding. Must not be cited as a constitutional drone-search holding. - (primary public record, [United States v. Deandra Sue Warford, United States of America v. Phillip Whatley, 439 F.3d 836 (8th Cir. 2006)](../../web%20archive/2026-08-10/ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/united-states-v-deandra-sue-warford-united-states-of-america-v-phillip-whatley-439-f-3d-836-8th-cir-2006.md)) — Naked-eye curtilage observation from a legally permissible helicopter altitude was not a search on the no-interference, no-intimate-detail record. Does not decide drones, sensors, persistent observation, or unusual low-altitude use. ## Marion quote and Batesville application boundary Marion produced a March 21, 2023 quote totaling `$7,397.98` for a DJI Mavic 3 Thermal package, accessories, consulting, training, and setup (`Inventory - Body Cam - Drones - Flock FOI.pdf`, pp. 9-11; [[Marion Body In-Car Camera Inventory and Drone Quote]]). The quote does not establish purchase, delivery, registration, policy adoption, operation, or flight history. Batesville's FY26 COPS application expressly answers `"No"` to purchasing UAS with the proposed award funds (`Grant Package A-529198 (redacted AR PIPA).pdf`, p. 15; [[Batesville FY26 COPS Technology Application]]). That response limits the proposed grant scope; it is not a complete agency drone inventory.