Re: [Leica] Shooting on Gov. Lands

[Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>]

What Pete has said is exactly on target. On another list (STOCKPHOTO) I
argued for standing your ground and got all kinds of flack. "You'll give
photographers a bad name" and the like. BS! You must be willing to stand
your ground, but also be willing to schmooz when necessary. What really
irks me is that in some parks, Point Reyes National Seashore, Yosemite, Pt.
Lobos, etc... you can photograph to your hearts content, yet in others,
you'll get hassled.

I also belong to the save Mono Lake Committee.

Great post Pete.

Jim


At 03:00 PM 3/2/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Dear LUGnuts:
>
>I would like to encourage any one that is confronted in photographing on
>public lands to politely insist on your rights to photograph. The original
>intent of the permit process in National Parks or BLM land or in National
>Forests was to prevent commercial projects - such as motion picture,
>television commercials and the like under control. It was not intended for
>prevention and regulation of still photography.
>
>There is a huge push in the National Forest Service and Park Service to
become
>"profitable" - that is to say, each Park or Forest system is trying to become
>self sustaining because Washington has greatly attenuated the flow of cash
>into their systems. In my opinion, the fault lies in Washington and a
Congress
>and Senate with political agendas to limit the abilities of these agenices to
>do their job.
>
>What ever the case, these agencies are scrambling to make money any way they
>can. For example, Yosemite upped their entrance fee from $5 to $20. The
sudden
>interest in Photographers as a source of revenue is pretty obvious.
>
>I would say the resonable exception to the above is when you require the Park
>or Forest Service to provide special privaledges to you in terms of access
>that the general public is prohibited from. Then, a fee structure seems
>appropriate.
>
>I must publically state my bias. I am a Fine Arts Photographer by profession.
>I shoot on BLM land, Forest Service land and sometimes in National Parks. It
>would be impossible for me to do my work if I was required to obtain a permit
>at each location.
>
>What may surprise some is the OTHER activities that can be performed on BLM
>land and Forest Service land - like exploring for mining without a permit.
>
>I had a run in with the Forest Service at Mono Lake a while back. Its kind of
>interesting. While Mono was in Forest Service lands for  many decades, they
>did not spear head the fight to save Mono Lake. We as the members of the Mono
>Lake Commitee did. When the fight was nearly over, the Forest Service built a
>nice new visitors center. Then, two years later, they are charging for ACCESS
>to Mono and the Visitors Center!! When asked why, their response was "to pay
>for our rangers that patrol and take care of the Lake". The only rangers I
>have EVER seen out at Mono was in collecting fees or at the Visitor's Center.
>
>What I objected to was the Fine Art Exhibit at the Visitors Center. The
people
>that had lent images to the Forest Service for the exhibit had done so as a
>courtesy for public display. Then, the Forest Service started to charge to
see
>the exhibit!! As this is my area of the world, I wrote up a formal complaint.
>Their response was that "museums charge". The problem with this argument is
>that Museums PAY the artist for their work or in some way compensate them for
>exhibiting their work where in the Forest Service does not - the money
goes in
>their pocket.
>
>I fear that we are slowly entering an age in which every one assumes that
they
>have some absolute rights to 'their' piece of the earth and no one has a
right
>to see it, photograph it or do anything with out $$$$$$$$$$$$$. Unfortunilty,

>the Forest Service, Park Service and BLM have seen to become part or the
"this
>is my AGENCIES land!" (*$&#(#@$*&#$
>
>Perhaps its important to point out that it is OUR public lands - and the
lands
>are  not to be used to keep the money machine going for the Forest Service
and
>BLM to keep their little worlds going. Washington puts preasure on them and
>they put it back on us as the users.
>
>Sorry for the long blast, but its an important issue and it effects every one
>that photographs.
>
>Pete Myers
>