The courts may have to clear up some questions if Territorians are to be protected from an animal welfare group's plan to use surveillance drones, the NT Attorney-General has said.

The group Animal Liberation has revealed plans to film from drones as low as ten metres above the ground, to gather potential evidence of animal abuse in farming practices.

John Elferink said the courts might have to decide whether a drone was an aircraft or a surveillance device.

But he said surveillance devices legislation meant the Territory was fairly well positioned to deal with the issue.

"At the moment, to surveil a person, basically, you need a Supreme Court warrant applied for, normally, by the police," Mr Elferink said.

"I think it's only the police who can apply for a warrant, and it's the Supreme Court that allows a surveillance device to be put in place."

Mr Elferink said common laws relating to trespass should also prevent the operation of drones over private property.

"The basic tenet of the rule of trespass is that your right as a property owner goes to the centre of the earth and into space to an almost infinite direction," he said.

"The effect of that is that to even shoot a bullet over a property is to trespass.

"But there are of course exceptions to that rule, such as flying an aircraft flying over it at a certain height."