Photography on BLM. FWS, and NPS Lands

[Drew Wiley]

Maybe they thought you were stealing rocks in the Petrified Forest, Kirk... or maybe it was that "Love Live Hayduke" bumper sticker! I've photographed there with a
view camera and no ranger incidents. I did have an old Brooklyn couple chew me out there once, after they stopped and walked over to see what all the fuss was
about...."Is theah a deah over theah? A beah?" ..."Then whyya takin a pickcha for if therah no deah or beah?" I got the last chuckle when they realized they had
locked their keys in the car. No problem, the ranger would simply radio for a locksmith in Flagstaff, who would appropriately charge for the four-hour round trip.
Don't imagine there is a locksmith in Holbrook; maybe a towing guy could do it, but he would probably tack on a "Brooklyn surcharge".

[Racer X 69]

Is there any meat in this issue for the ACLU to chew on ?. . .First Amendmendment or something? Claim you are worshiping nature (as a Druid?) or something else?

There you go!

[Racer X 69]

Now, a request to see a backcountry permit, or fishing permit, etc., is another story...

You use your camera for fishing?

[Drew Wiley]

If you have enough holes in the bellows, a view camera should comprise a perfectly functional fishing net.

[Kirk Gittings]

Knowing you two, Jan probably pointed at Kirk and said "you ought to hassle that guy." Hey Kirk, while you're down at the petrified forest try to learn the secret of the perpetual woody;-)

calcedony viagra?

[TXFZ1]

You use your camera for fishing?

When backpacking in Colorado with the Sierra Club, we would buy hunting/fishing permits as it included insurance for emergency rescues.

David

[Jeff Conrad]

I’ve updated my article at http://www.largeformatphotography.info/photo-permits/. I haven’t been able to get a clarification on what constitutes “any other equipment,” so there really isn’t any new information since my original post.

I should remind that the proposed location fee schedule—which will apply to the Forest Service as well as the DOI agencies—is open to public comment until 23 September. The DOI have obviously responded to comments that earlier fee schedules were unreasonably burdensome for small-scale photographers and filmmakers; the proposed fees are now $10/day (or $250/month) for still photography involving 1–3 people and only a camera and tripod, and $50/day for still photography involving 1–5 people and “more than a camera and tripod.”

There should be little impact for landscape photographers who use only a camera and tripod and don’t photograph “models”; no permit or fee will be required. For other circumstances, the reasonableness of the proposed fees obviously depends on the meaning of “more than a camera and tripod.” If this will be taken literally, applying to equipment such as a camera-mounted flash, a handheld light meter, or even collapsible reflectors or diffusers that might be used in portrait photography or in close-ups of flowers and similar things, $50/day seems pretty outrageous. It should be mentioned that the proposed fees are in addition to application processing fees and any other fess associated with cost recovery. The proposed fee schedule does not address insurance requirements.

The specifics were covered in the Federal Register on 22 August 2013, at 78 FR 52209–11; comments can be sent via e-mail to location_fee_notice_2013@nps.gov, with “Commercial Filming Fee Schedule” in the subject line.