The last DARPA grand challenge (Subterrainean) had automated drone networks that could find and identify humans in caves and tunnels. They were at least up front about the military challenges in these environments. (https://www.darpa.mil/program/darpa-subterranean-challenge), but the nod at civilian first-responders doesn't seem fair. Honestly, is cave-in such a big civilian problem that we need to prioritize it as a talking point at all levels?
Everything about the rocketry needed to get to orbit started from warfare purposes, for example. And ARPANET was a foray into how to build a disruption-resistant network for military purposes.
Science and knowledge are a bit of a soup.
Considering (1) the number of people who are employed in mining occupations, (2) the frequency of serious accidents in mines, yes. Particularly in developed countries, societies expect that great lengths will be gone to rescue or recover the victims, and mine rescue is incredibly dangerous work.
(1) BLS says ~200K in the US in 2024, although only a minority of them work underground.
(2) BLS says "underground mining machine operators" is the 9th deadliest job in the US, and that is with a large and well-equipped mine rescue system (MSRA says 250 teams across the country).
Roofers, fishing and hunting workers, construction "helpers", etc?
There's a case to be made that some of them are, I guess.
Pragmatically speaking, when someone falls off a roof or a tree, it doesn't turn into a highly public, high-risk, government-responsibility rescue mission. When someone gets trapped in a mine, it does.
(If you fall off a tree logging in Alaska, there is a good chance a USCG helicopter crew comes to your aid, but that is more of a "five minutes in the local news" story than "nightly news host reporting live on location" event.)
According to [1] there were 8 deaths in underground machine operators category in 2022.
There's a more detailed table at [2] but I don't quite understand how this aligns with the first one (the numbers seem different, but I think the category is "Mining (except oil and gas)").
In any case the majority of fatalities are from "Transportation incidents" or "Contact with object and equipment". I think cave-ins would be classed as "Fires and explosions"
[1] https://www.bls.gov/charts/census-of-fatal-occupational-inju...
[2] https://www.bls.gov/iif/fatal-injuries-tables/fatal-occupati...
(Certainly not advocating for this, but noting that it's the most likely trigger to get the ball rolling on regulation of drones in military operation where very little currently exists).
An oil terminal in Feodosia is still burning after the latest Ukrainina strike.
There was even a few cases of re-purposed ultra light aircraft serving as one way drones for ultra long range strikes on the Ukrainian side.
In another region Israel has to shoot down various terrorist launched one way UAVs almost regularly by this point & uses UAVs heavily by itself.
So while US certainly did pioneer UAV use, it seems to be it is getting eclipsed by other states in this area.
Drones are useful. There have been zero useful technologies in war that have ever been successfully banned. (No [1].)
Every weapon that has been banned brought asymmetric advantage, i.e. disadvantaged the powerful, or has had its ban flouted, e.g. cluster munitions.
[1] https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-ch...