Comments on: Forest Service: no photographing wilderness lands without permission

By: Canvasback

Canvasback — Sun, 28 Sep 2014 14:47:39 +0000

When I was a lad in Washington State the Forest Service had a reputation for honest, good-natured inefficiency. Now they’re a little less honest, a lot less good natured. I just wonder how long they can hang on to their inefficiency.

By: JeremiadJones

JeremiadJones — Sun, 28 Sep 2014 12:02:03 +0000

Would that ban include satellite photography? And is it only about photography, or would oil paintings of the trees also be banned?

By: ras

ras — Sun, 28 Sep 2014 02:29:25 +0000

Who is being exploited? A tree?

Moreover, if I take a pic of the park from outside its boundaries, am I still “guilty?” From outside the country?

(Ladt pt not hypothetical. I live in Canada but can see various US national parks in the distance.)

By: Jonathan Bailey

Jonathan Bailey — Sun, 28 Sep 2014 00:04:00 +0000

IANAL but looking at the Act it seems to me that the intent is to prevent physical exploitation, e.g., logging, mining or other activities that could physically change the landscape. To call photography, making images of the landscape, commercial exploitation seems like a very big stretch to me.

This sounds more to me like the Forest Service is looking to tap into a revenue stream than trying to protect a mountain stream.

By: Hugo S. Cunningham

Hugo S. Cunningham — Sat, 27 Sep 2014 18:01:33 +0000

Our Federal government would not override the “freedom of the press” without good reason. They must have a secret intercept from an ISIL operative planning to publish a book of nature photographs from national forests and use the profits to sponsor terrorism.

By: Heresolong

Heresolong — Sat, 27 Sep 2014 14:51:17 +0000

Hahahahahahahahaha!

Oh wait, they’re serious?

By: Eric

Eric — Sat, 27 Sep 2014 14:43:28 +0000

50 years later they’re just now getting around to “following the statutory requirements”? Sure.

So when does the series of Federal wildland government-sanctioned photos hit the gift shops? And who will be the commercial photography company hired to do the official photographs? And what is his record of political contributions?

By: Wfjag

Wfjag — Sat, 27 Sep 2014 14:18:44 +0000

Let’s see if I get this First Amendment thingy:

If I go to Sea World and take photos of kids in wet bathing suits, focusing on their breasts and buttocks, that’s protect; but, if I go to a publicly owned park and photos of trees, lakes and sun sets, that’s criminal behavior.