Chris Wright is a problem solver. Herclients come to her with an issue, a question, a mystery, and she figures outthe best way to find the answer – using whatever tools she can. “I use acombination of new technology and old technology, because I have to solve aproblem. So I’ve used everything from geese and dogs to Roombas to drones to GPS.”

Wright is a private investigator – andowner of the Wright Group – based in Anaheim, California. She’s worked in thebusiness for more than 40 years, and has seen the tools available toinvestigators change dramatically. Early on, stakeouts in vans were important.More recently new technology in the form of tiny cameras and social media hasbegun to play a role. And she’s embraced those changes. Today, when the problem calls for it, sheuses drones to do her work.

She gives me a few examples. If two peopleare meeting in a public place, a drone can be a helpful way to discreetly watchthem. “We stay at about 50-75 feet [15-23 metres] above so nothing can beheard.” Drones are also helpful for aerial surveillance of locations that arehard to access on foot. And if a school or church is worried someone might bestealing or vandalising property, drones or small off-road vehicles (“Roombas onsteroids”as she calls them) can film the property.

In one case, Wright was asked to figure outwhether or not a soda salesperson was crossing county lines and cheating on hiscontract. California is one of many states in which salespeople have regionalcontracts – for instance, Bob sells Pepsi in Los Angeles County and Nancy sellsPepsi in Orange County. If Nancy arrives at her usual businesses to sell herPepsi and finds the soda supply has already been topped up, there’s a goodchance that someone (perhaps Bob) has crossed county lines and sold illegally.

Wright was asked to figure out whether thiswas happening. To do so meant visiting every major soda wholesaler from SanLuis Obispo to San Diego – about 300 miles (480km) of California coast – andchecking whether any were selling soda from the wrong salesperson. When therewas illegal soda on sale, she would use a drone to follow the soda deliverytrucks back to their depots. In one case, the warehouse the truck led her backto was out in the desert and would have been impossible to approach by car orfoot without being noticed. But the drone was able to spy on the truckscovertly. “We could see between the warehouse door and the truck loading.”

Wright gets her drones from high-end toystores, for about $200 each. They’re an expensive investment: not only do youhave to buy the device, you also have to pay one or two people to pilot andspot the thing. And if you lose one during a mission, you’re out a good chunkof your budget. But it can be worth it, because for the cases in which they’re useful,they can be very useful indeed.

Wright doesn’t pilot the drones herself. “Itry to hire gamers. I go to the colleges and high schools and I find out whothe geeks are, and then I hire them.” She said that her pilots are more skilledthan she would ever be – and they like the challenge. Some of them are workingtowards their own private investigator licences, and their hours piloting thelittle devices can count as hours towards their certification. (None ofWright’s gamer pilots were willing to talk for this article. “They’reintroverts,” she told me. “Not shy, but introverts.”)

Understandably, the idea of using drones tospy on people isn’t something everybody is comfortable with. In a case in Seattlein 2013, a woman reported that someone was using a drone to spy on her. “Thisafternoon, a stranger set an aerial drone into flight over my yard and besidemy house near Miller Playfield,” she told the Capitol Hill Seattle Blog. “Iinitially mistook its noisy buzzing for a weed-whacker on this warm spring day.After several minutes, I looked out my third-story window to see a drone hoveringa few feet away.”Her husband asked the drone operator, who was standing nearby, tomove along –but the operator claimed to be acting within his legal rights.

Tightening regulations

Whether that’s true isn’t always clear.According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 35 statesconsidered adding drone bills to the books last year, and 10 states actuallydid add new laws. In Iowa, for example, it’s now illegal for the state to usedrones to enforce traffic laws. In North Carolina, no one can use a drone forsurveillance of a person or private property. And Tennessee now specifies thatit’s a misdemeanor to use drones for surveillance of people who arehunting or fishing.

Wright’s drone operations might soon becomelegally questionable too. Earlier this month, a California senator introduced abill that would extend property rights into airspace, meaning that drones flyingover private property would be considered trespassers. Just a few days beforethat, President Obama and the Federal Aviation Administration announced newdrone regulations as well, requiring – among other things – that drones must beunder 55lb (25kg) and that operators must keep the flying vehicles in sight atall times.

Because the laws are murky, many privateinvestigators steer clear of drones. “The use of drones for surveillance ishighly restricted by law,” said Kelly Riddle, a private investigator in Texas.“There are air space regulations as well as privacy laws that can easily beviolated. Obtaining video using a drone has thus far been something that wehave been advised is illegal.” That’s because drones are often used to observeactivities that can’t be seen via a direct line of sight at ground level. Goingout of your way to spy on such activities is considered an invasion of privacy,says Riddle. A lot of Wright’s work sidesteps this privacy question, because it involves helpingschools and churches monitor their own property.

In all likelihood, the use of drones will berestricted under a more comprehensive set of rules and regulations in theUnited States sooner than later. But in the meantime Wright will continue touse them when they can help with her work. But she also says that regardless ofthe legality, if someone thinks their privacy is being compromised, they’regoing to do something about it. That can mean shooting down drones – anotheractivity that may or may not be legal. “I think a lot of my colleagues havelost them and realised that it is a tool, and if you invade someone’s privacy,well, if they can hit it they will.”