Forest Service: New Regulation/Fines?

[dsphotog]

Only the "bad" stories make the news.....
I've never had a problem in a park or wilderness...
Since my big cameras make me a slow moving target, I think it's extra important not to be an bother to anyone, and don't do anything stupid.
I don't want to give guards, cops, or rangers an excuse to find a reason to want me out of their territory.
I try to be a good ambassador for "traditional photography", on the other hand, when I want to make a shot, I don't ask first, I'd rather plead ignorance to some silly rule.

[gleaf]

For those who want to put up with RESTRICTIONS & PERMITS & INSPECTION of your all both going in and coming out.....
There is not too far from the Los Angeles basin an exquisite natural and protected world heritage preserve that FS cares for.
Nothing but Nothing left behind. And yes to you must pack out your own waste.
And yes it requires a permit... but you just might get the photo's no one else will ever have.
Perhaps FS might appreciate the LF approach to the nature they so carefully preserve.

[Drew Wiley]

Interesting, Jeff.. but with people habitually skinny-dipping out in the wilderness, seems a bit hypocritical. But at one time, prior to the trail bike invasion, that Moab
area was kinda xenophobic, and certain local cops tried to act tough toward outsiders. I remember. The other thing is, that certain well-known pro photographers who talked the eco talk in print could sometimes be pretty damn roughshod on protective rules in person, even to the point of engaging in what any of us would unequivocally term vandalism. So would any ranger that encountered such activity. I don't want to mention any names. But this whole thing of "deserving" to get an out-of-bounds shot of something sealed off, or having the right to collect a rare souvenir of something deliberately protected, because your ego has gotten a bit overinflated from public recognition - well, go figure. It gives all of us photographers a bad name and inevitable spawns a degree of suspicion among authorities.
We all need to consider what they have to deal with too. A lot of we country kids dreamed of outdoor careers, but were a bit naive about the system. Some got to
the upper ranks of the FS and then found out that meant a desk job in a city. Others thought they'd be out there with deer and cougars, but found out there were
stuck doing law full-time enforcement of careless or drunken campers. People get into these positions for the same reasons we like to go outdoors. But things happen - boring paperwork, internal politics and peck-orders, unruly public activities, forest fires, you name it. I don't like being accosted anymore than anyone else.
But in comparison to the sheer extent of my travels (and I'm in some kind of public park jurisdiction at least once every single week with large camera gear), the
negative incidents have been extremely rare. And in general, it's been a very small percent of the authorities who have behaved like bad apples, just like in most
other careers.

[Kirk Gittings]

I never give cause and yet have had problems many times-by far mostly in AZ with the NPS. In addition to stories I have told before, I was once at Wupatki with my assistant and a 4x5 and told I needed a permit for commercial shooting. Trouble is I am a commercial shooter but this was personal work-which is a bit hard to explain but either way I did not need a permit for what I was doing-on a common trail, no models, not blocking access, within normal hours etc. They did not believe me but let me go when I showed them their own regs on still photography. Same day at another site in Wupatki we hiked away from my SUV a little ways on a legit trail and I turned around and saw a park Ranger intently pointing a flashlight into my vehicle looking for who knows what. I confronted her and she said she was looking to see if we were stealing artifacts. I got angry and asked her "based on what? What were we doing but looking at ruins and taking photographs?" She had no explanation. I think we embarrassed them when we showed them their own regs and had followed us and were looking to find some way to get us. 99% of rangers I have encountered have been terrific, but the bad ones still leave me with really bad feelings.

On the other side I have been working recently a lot at the Petrified Forest as an AIR and have nothing but terrific experiences.

Only the "bad" stories make the news.....
I've never had a problem in a park or wilderness...
Since my big cameras make me a slow moving target, I think it's extra important not to be an bother to anyone, and don't do anything stupid.
I don't want to give guards, cops, or rangers an excuse to find a reason to want me out of their territory.
I try to be a good ambassador for "traditional photography", on the other hand, when I want to make a shot, I don't ask first, I'd rather plead ignorance to some silly rule.

[Drew Wiley]

Maybe they had pilfering incidents before after dark, had reason to be suspicious, and were doing a routine check. I've been scolded by ranch owners on back roads
around here who saw my truck pulled over and assumed I was dumping trash on the side of the road, where this kind of thing routinely happens. I've been around
Wupatki any number of times, but never after dark. I've been positively harassed by cops and rangers a few times in the Arizona strip, including the North Rim of
GC, even run out of town, four times on a single trip (when my wife was along, who is nonwhite); but those were unquestionably accidental encounters with cult members, who pretty much dominate that neighborhood and its public roles, clear up to Kanab. On the other hand, I've been through that part of the world any
number of other times with no incident. I was a little cautious about setting up the 4x5 and taking interesting shots of particularly rednecky themes in rural Nevada
last week, and could have kicked myself for forfeiting a couple real interesting shots, but decided it would be wiser to use the 6x7 and move quickly instead. It was
right in the heart of one of the more recent potentially violent spasms of the Sagebrush Rebellion, and didn't want to be once again suspected of being a Govt spy.

[Kirk Gittings]

It was not after or even near dark, it was like maybe 3:30 in September, well before the park closing. The flashlight was used I presume to peer into darker areas of the floor. We were in the official group parking lot for that particular ruin and had paid and displayed our entrance fee. If there was some ongoing problem they were exploring they could have said so-but they didn't. I'm pretty sure they were trying to find something to get me back for showing them up earlier by knowing their own regs better than they did.

[Jeff Conrad]

Drew, I have absolutely no sympathy for people who break the rules and then whine about the consequences—and we’re likely thinking of some of the same people. Neither am I impressed when someone runs roughshod on the landscape even if not actually breaking any rules—I’ll never forget my reaction to an article in the Zone VI Newsletter describing how to “properly” cut saplings that were interfering with the composition. I loved Fred Picker, but could hardly believe he had written this.

But my take is similar to Kirk’s. Although comparatively infrequent, there have been more than a few incidents of rangers from all federal agencies insisting that any “commercial” photography needed a permit, when that has never been the case. Those responsible were too lazy to read the laws, too stupid to understand them, or they simply thought the laws did not apply to them. Such people are properly described as criminals, badge lickers to the contrary notwithstanding. Those clowns need to be retrained or replaced; holding my breath I am not.

With the person in Canyonlands, I was less concerned with the hypocrisy of the ranger’s allegation about “local moral standards” than with illegality of such a criterion even if the ranger was correct. When a law delegates policy decisions to low-level enforcement personnel—and here I would emphasize low—it offends the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Even more egregious was the fact that there was no law that could have even remotely been construed as requiring a permit.

As we’ve all said yet again, the vast majority of encounters with field staff are just great. Unfortunately, one clash with one of the jerks tends to linger in memory far longer that do the good experiences. I’ve expressed my concerns with the current regulations many times; those concerns arise only because the wording in a couple of places is sufficiently vague so as to give one of the jerks an opening to push someone around. It’s sad that so much time and energy is expended discussing the actions of said jerks. And even sadder for those on the receiving end of their antics.

Having said all this, again, I don’t think the FS proposal rises to that level. If anything, it distracts from the greater issue.

[Dave Wooten]

Are BLM regs same as national forest/park regs? I'd like to get a copy.

[Drew Wiley]

BLM, FS, and NP's are all different agencies. Official Wilderness areas might be administered by any of them, or jointly in certain cases. You also have things like designated Recreation Areas, with another layer of stricter rules due to anticipated higher public usage, as well as inholdings with grazing and mining rights in numerous cases. So you really need to study to specific jurisdiction involved when in question, or if there is not appropriate signage. This is easy to do nowadays
because you can simply search the relevant web page for the SPECIFIC Natl Forest or NP involved. But this does not mitigate Jeff's remark above about rogues,
be they either individuals on Fed land assuming squatters rights or doing illegal activity like growing dope. There are also no doubt a number of outright poorly educated jerks in the lower ranks of the BLM and FS, who might be in cahoots with some drug operation or illegal logging activity themselves. It's best to outright
avoid those areas where you might have suspicion about shady activity, regardless of who is involved, and obviously steer clear of anyone high or drunk acting wigged out. But in general, I've had a lot more to fear from drunken hunters in the Fall than any deliberately criminal types. If they're drinking and shooting from
the road, I quickly hike in at least a mile before doing photography, or if doing shots from the roads, first drive around a bit to see where the hunters actually are.
Unfortunately, in some places fall color does coincide with elk or deer season, but that can also be researched in advance.

[Drew Wiley]

Jeff - I actually know of a well-published outdoor photographer who sawed a significant limb off one of the most ancient bristlecone pines (in a designated preserve),
and displayed it on his fireplace mantle. That took some nerve. But it does show that the dissing works both way ... we complain about rogue rangers, but they no
doubt have good reason to complain about rogue pro photographers.