“I’m an active Airline Transport Pilot and certificated part 107 sUAS pilot. I love flying both at my day job and in my hobby. RemoteID would all but eliminate my ability to fly my drones, as the parts of the golf courses and farmer’s fields where I fly (with permission) are indeed “remote”, with little to no cellphone coverage and no WiFi access at all. I’m not willing to drive 45 miles to the nearest “approved field”, when I can get to my favorite spots within 10 minutes. I am also uninterested in flying around in circles over a flat field. I like proximity flying; zipping between tree branches, under overhanging bushes, and long, straight, fast, ultra-low-level flying along the golf cart paths (when the clubs are closed). Technology already exists to permit seeing drone traffic electronically: FLARM. FLARM is mature, comparatively inexpensive, useful to hobbyists, and has minimal impacts on weight or practicality. I could get on board with a requirement for FLARM, if doing so opened up more flying areas by deconflicting UAS-UAS and UAS-manned aircraft; but the current RemoteID proposals are downright Draconian, and appear to me to represent an “airspace grab” by and for the “drone delivery” entities eg Amazon, UPS, etc. We CAN all “just get along”. Smashing this incredibly fun, incredibly educational hobby with a legislative sledgehammer is an atrocious overreach, thus I do NOT support RemoteID.”