National Park filming legislation - Page 8 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > Under Water, Over Land

Under Water, Over Land
Tools & Techniques for Nature, Outdoors, Wildlife & Underwater Videography.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 11th, 2009, 12:53 AM   #106
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 904
I guess I just need to present my lovely self and see what they say on the day I am there. It really ought to be standardized. (sigh). This sucks.
Chris Swanberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2009, 05:34 PM   #107
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sterling Heights, Michigan
Posts: 105
This document, found on the Glacier web site --
http://www.nps.gov/glac/planyourvisi...n%20092606.pdf

--says 1-2 people, camera and tripod only, there is no fee.


Duane
Duane Burleson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2009, 05:46 PM   #108
Trustee
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Posts: 1,499
No, it says you don't have to pay LOCATION fees. Says you are still subject to cost recovery fees etc.

It was going to cost me thousands to film in Yellowstone with no LOCATION fees. They wanted to have a ranger follow me all over to make sure I was following the rules and because my tripod was a "trip hazard". Even though pro still photographers would have been right next to me with their cameras mounted on tripods.
__________________
--==Kevin==--
http:filmmakingnaturally.com
Kevin Railsback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2009, 07:55 PM   #109
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York City
Posts: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duane Burleson View Post
This document, found on the Glacier web site
This defines commercial filming as digital or film--so if you still shoot Beta SP, you should be fine.
__________________
Andy Tejral
Railroad Videographer
Andy Tejral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2009, 08:36 PM   #110
Trustee
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Posts: 1,499
Commercial videographers, cinematographers or sound recording crews of up to two people with only minimal equipment (i.e. a camera and a tripod) working in areas open to the public are required to obtain a commercial filming permit and are subject to appropriate permit terms and conditions and cost recovery charges but are not subject to location fees

You're screwed with Beta SP too.
__________________
--==Kevin==--
http:filmmakingnaturally.com
Kevin Railsback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2009, 08:19 AM   #111
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York City
Posts: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Railsback View Post
You're screwed with Beta SP too.
Hey, I'm just reporting what I read.
__________________
Andy Tejral
Railroad Videographer
Andy Tejral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2009, 09:56 PM   #112
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Railsback View Post
Commercial videographers, cinematographers or sound recording crews of up to two people with only minimal equipment (i.e. a camera and a tripod) working in areas open to the public are required to obtain a commercial filming permit and are subject to appropriate permit terms and conditions and cost recovery charges but are not subject to location fees

You're screwed with Beta SP too.
This is not true. I was involved with filming 2 docs in Yosemite and on 2 separate occasions we had no problems whatsoever.
First of all- know your rights. Your problem was you talked to some idiot ranger. You are on a public property. That means you can film, unless the areas are closed to the public. If the ranger had a different opinion he should have quoted you an RCW governing this area of the park law. There are no such RCW, as they would be in violation with 1st amendment. Even ban on firearms in national park was overturned last year (not that i like it), but it shows the trend.
The worst come to worst they would have cited you. National parks have federal judges, who would gladly hear your case .
I think the whole issue is absurd- my approach- keep low profile and DON'T ASK RANGERS! (for a period of 10 years I spent numerous months in national parks, so i am talking from the first hand experience)
After more digging:
"Permits are generally are not required for:
Visitors using cameras and/or recording devices for their own personal use."
Unless you have contract in hand any work is considered "personal use" till actually sold.
Robert Rogoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2009, 11:21 PM   #113
Trustee
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Posts: 1,499
The idiot ranger I talked to was Lee Dickinson in Washington.

There will be cost recovery charges to cover the cost of processing the application and if approved, issuing the permit. For crews of 1 - 2 people, camera and tripod only the location fee is zero. There may be places where you will wish to film that a monitor will be necessary. Please discuss this specifically with the park filming permit coordinator Stacy Vallie. You can find her contact information and other information about obtaining a permit at Yellowstone at Yellowstone National Park (U.S. National Park Service)
Lee Dickinson
Special Park Uses Program Manager
Visitor and Resource Protection
National Park Service
202/513-7092
202/371-1710 (fax)

The problem was Stacy wanted me to have a monitor the whole time I was there.


I guess I just need to be like everyone else and just ignore the rules and shoot anyway.
__________________
--==Kevin==--
http:filmmakingnaturally.com
Kevin Railsback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 19th, 2009, 08:29 AM   #114
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North Conway, NH
Posts: 1,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Rogoz View Post
Unless you have contract in hand any work is considered "personal use" till actually sold.
Excellent point.
Tripp Woelfel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 19th, 2009, 09:58 AM   #115
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Deep South, U.S.
Posts: 1,380
Robert,
I guess I am one of those idiot park rangers. At my location staying under the radar (one or two persons) generally works. We require filming permits for events such as concerts, commerical advertisements, movies etc. Those that fit this catagory may require rangers to facilitate traffic control, safety, perimeter security and to prevent damage to public property. Permit fees are calculated by me based on a $50 initial fee then the time/equipment charges of the rangers. I recall a permit I issued to HBO to film a part of the movie "Warm Springs". They used a closed campground on the lake for about 5 days with a 30 person crew. We prepared the park for thier use (electricity and restrooms etc.) and had a ranger with them to facilitate any issues that came up during the shoot about use of the property. The total cost of thier permit was $800 which was reasonable to both parties. HBO was greatful for the ranger presence.

Of course what is really at issue here is every federal agency and even parks may have different rules and interpretations to follow. Some reasonable and some not. The proposed bill defines a small crew and IMO is fair. I don't have a problem (myself) paying $200 a year to film on all federal property if it alleviates possible arguement with the authorities. Also, it would be fine with me if H. R. 5502 was reauthored to define that the "small crew" does not require a permit.

As far as the outcome of filming w/o a permit, I have issued 4 citations in my career for filming w/o a permit. They were large operations (over 15 man crews) and were generally uncooperative. They were evicted from the property and all went before a federal magistrate. I won all 4 cases. Fines ranged from $125 to $500. In all but one instance the defendants came back several weeks later with a better attitude and got the proper permit.
__________________
Mark
videos: http://vimeo.com/channels/3523

Last edited by Mark Williams; February 19th, 2009 at 11:19 AM.
Mark Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 19th, 2009, 04:02 PM   #116
Trustee
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Posts: 1,499
Mark,

Can you get a job in Yellowstone! :)

I'd happily pay $200 for an annual permit, especially if the money stays in the park system.

I've seen the parks and its services deteriorate because their budgets are some of the first to be cut. So if I can film on Federal land for $200 a year and it all stays for Parks, BLM, Forests etc then I'm all for it.

I think it'll also help out with all the people who don't live in the US and pay taxes that maintain the parks etc from kicking in some too.

But don't ask me to pay $4k in fees to stand next to a still photographer who is shooting the same thing I'd be shooting and not even require a permit period.
__________________
--==Kevin==--
http:filmmakingnaturally.com
Kevin Railsback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 19th, 2009, 04:31 PM   #117
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Deep South, U.S.
Posts: 1,380
Hi Kevin,

I keep tracking the progress of H. R. 5502 and it seems to be going no where. I think its time to rekindle the e-mail campaign to our legislators. I think this bill has a better chance of going forward under the "new" administration than the old. My experience is that funding for federal recreation agencies has generally faired better under the democrats. As far as the condition of the federal parks you might find this interesting. I spent the afternoon today responding to our agency participation in a stimulus spending package exercise. Look's like there is a 50/50 chance of addtional $$$ for facility maintenance, road paving, modernization and energy conservation. I think this may apply in some fashion to most federal agencies.

As far as working in Yellowstone...not my cup of tea. I have heard way to many horror stories about working there. Also, this will be my last year with the feds as I am retiring and plan to be shooting video full time.
__________________
Mark
videos: http://vimeo.com/channels/3523
Mark Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2009, 02:46 AM   #118
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 904
Hey..... I just thought of a new angle.

It is based on Canon's new DSLR that cans also shoot some pretty awesome video.

I go into the park to shoot commercial stills. No permit. Just me, camera and tripod

At some point I change the camera to shoot some commercially intended video. Same camera, same tripod and still just me.

Did that trigger a need for a permit? Recovery fees?

WHY???????

Food for thought.

Chris

Last edited by Chris Swanberg; February 20th, 2009 at 02:25 PM.
Chris Swanberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2009, 02:03 PM   #119
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 457
Mark, as far as you describe:
"As far as the outcome of filming w/o a permit, I have issued 4 citations in my career for filming w/o a permit. They were large operations (over 15 man crews) and were generally uncooperative. They were evicted from the property and all went before a federal magistrate. I won all 4 cases. Fines ranged from $125 to $500. In all but one instance the defendants came back several weeks later with a better attitude and got the proper permit."
There is a big, big difference between 1 or 2 person party filming something that might sell and 15-30 person crew working on a budgeted commercial project. I filmed a few climbing documentaries in Yosemite 2 times, and I filmed recently in Canadian Rockies (Banff and Jasper NP). In Yosemite we decided to "fly under radar" upon the advice of a friendly ranger; in Canada nobody cares at all. Anyway, from a legal stand point any work is considered a "private use", unless there is actual contract for sale in place. If a party wants me to do a commercial in Yosemite NP, they pay for the work it is a commercial filming venture. If I am filming a climbing party on El Capitan, hoping to sell it to Versus or ESPN later on it is a private use till the sale goes through. You'd have mighty hard time convincing any federal judge otherwise. (I checked with my DA friend on this one).
As you see I am against this stupid micro management on public lands. Reminds me situations, where land managers regulate anchor placements in rock climbing areas, next to highways and several power lines running through within few hundreds of feet. Simply doesn't make any sense.
Robert Rogoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2009, 02:54 PM   #120
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Deep South, U.S.
Posts: 1,380
Robert,

I agree with most of what you said. Its all in how the regulations are written. NPS and USFS have specific filming regulations. Mine (USACE) does not but includes it under special event permits and unauthorized commercial activity which covers basically anything you want it to. You are entitled to your intepretation of the regulations and feel free to test them. I am just stating my experiences as a private citizen videographer and regulatory enforcer. Actually it all comes down to how the US Magistrate interprets things. I have had two different Magistrates render different rullings on almost identical offenses. The key to resolving this whole situation IMO is to get legislation passed to exempt small crews from permits or have a yearly low cost permit that is good on all federal lands regardless of which agency manages it.
__________________
Mark
videos: http://vimeo.com/channels/3523

Last edited by Mark Williams; February 20th, 2009 at 03:42 PM.
Mark Williams is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > Under Water, Over Land

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:58 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network