Got out 45 e-mails over the weekend to governors, chamber of commerce near large parks and to congressmen. Will do more tonite.

Thanks for this thread. Most of my docs are in national parks and forests, for weeks at a time, and I could never even begin to pay these fees. I don't mind paying a reasonable fee but this is outrageous.

Hey Mat,

Yes, the current law could be quite expensive for you or anyone else that wants to shoot on Federal lands.

I'm starting another big email push tomorrow and emailing as many people as I can.
The more that speak up the better chances are that someone who can make this happen will hear.

Kevin,

Please PM me or post here if you have a more selective list of persons to contact other than those already listed. Thanks for the good work.

I sent the letter to every Georgia member of congress except David Scott. He is harder to email than any one of them. I also copied the US Speaker of the House. Bob

I have been following this thread for awhile and have no new opinion but when Bob Landis came up I thought I would put my two cents in. According to an interview he has almost all of his footage on wolves is from the road. It seems like he is unobtrusive to both the park and wolves. Maybe the key to good access and footage is a low profile.

Dale,

The problem is that if you don't have a permit and don't pay the fees then you are breaking the law.
Can't you be charged with a felony for breaking a law on Federal land?

I've only filmed on the road, on the trails or on the boardwalks. I don't go anywhere where the public can't go and I don't do anything that professional photographers can't do.

If I was a still photographer I could take photographs anywhere where the public is allowed, sell them to any magazine, calendar company whatever and I don;t have to pay the park a dime. As long as I'm doing what the public is allowed to do, the park service can't do anything.

But, if I pick up a video camera, suddenly I have to pay $200, I have to have a $1,000,000 liability policy with the park service named as an additional insured, PLUS, I was required to pay $65 an hour to have a ranger follow me on a photo tour that was full of still photographers DOING THE SAME THING!
If I had left my video camera at home and brought my still camera I could have taken photographs to my hearts content and not have a worry in the world.

I know I can go into the park and shoot illegally by keeping a low profile and most likely never get caught but why should I have to break the law?

Why is it that when you have a video camera, you have to prove yourself to the park service that you can follow laws etc when still photographers do not.
I've personally seen still photographers do things that were blatantly against the rules.

I don't have a problem paying a fee for a permit that covers all federal land. I think photographers should have to pay it as well. It gives something back to the park.
You could make the argument that the park is there because we've paid for it and continue to pay for it so why should we have to pay for something that we've already paid for again? But if the money stays with the parks and national forests etc for improvements or whatever then fine.

Bob Landis is the unofficial official filmmaker for Yellowstone. I'd bet money he pays a single $200 fee for the year and that's it.

I emailed him asking about it and he did say that you can get a permit that covers the whole year. Well, maybe he can because Stacy Vallie, the film permit officer in Yellowstone, basically indicated to me in an email that these fees she was imposing on me were for my first trip in February even though I had asked if I could get the permit to cover the year as I planned on filming there several times over the course of the year.

So, why can Bob shoot for a year for $200 and no one else can?

I'm almost half temped to go for an extended trip in Yellowstone shoot as much as I can then put the footage all in the public domain.

Since I'm not making money off the footage, there's no permit required nothing. Maybe if this bill fails that's what I will do.

Someone needs footage of something in Yellowstone, I'll shoot it for free and put the footage into the public domain.

Can you tell I'm irritated by this? :)

BTW, here's an interview of Bob talking about his film In the Valley of the Wolves where he says he spent 1200 days in the park filming.

http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/M...3&id=203180821

Kevin, we have got to work hard to see that this bill goes through. I don't want to slink around in the parks either violating the regulations. I will add that even though we are in agreement on the $200 yearly fee and say it gets passed, that is not the end of it. Federal agencies are notorious for adding extras such as seperate commercial iability insurance in the ridiculous amount of 1 million as well as additional processing fees. I just hope the permit process is kept simple.

wow, this thread is humming along! i haven't had a chance to check in, in a few days. glad to see some mo-mo building.

one suggestion that i would make for any letter writing campaign would be to say something about how changes in digital video technology has created a new class of serious amateur video hobbyist, just as still camera technology has widened the field of long lens users who can be mistaken for professionals.

something about a tiered structure for fees, so that the serious video hobbyists is assessed the same as the serious amateur photographer (e.g. nothing!)

and the single commercial operator is not assessed the same as a crew--certainly they are quite different in terms of their impact...

maybe we should make a video and link it to the congressperson's letter--a picture worth a thousand words!

anyway, just a few suggestions on the fly....rules should keep up with the changes in the marketplace which are created by changes in technology.

maybe we need to make a video to link to add to the congressperson's letter --- picture worth a thousand words and all that! we are image people after all...

Mark,
I'm sure if this bill manages to pass,it'll be a constant vigil to keep on top of things wanting to creep in an get added.

But you know, the fact that I had to add the park service onto my liability policy even makes it more ludicrous.

I mean if you trip over Joe Public's tripod at Old Faithful don't you think the park would be named in a suit as well as the photographer for allowing a tripping hazard on the boardwalk?

They have less problems with me since they've got a million dollar policy that I'm paying for should something happen that I cause.

So, aren't they even more protected by me than the general public? Yet they want to require me to pay for a ranger to sit and watch to make sure no one trips over my tripod while right next to me is a photographer who has no insurance to protect the park setting up their tripod.

I think it's a good idea for everyone these days to have a liability policy.
Now that the park service is on my policy it doesn't cost anything additional to renew it.

I checked with my insurance agent and if you add the park service on as an additional insured at renewal time, it costs nothing. If you add them any time other than at renewal time it's $35.

Course that's the insurance company that underwrites my policy, others may differ.

I wish I could sit in a room with these people and tell them face to face about all this.

i think I'll call my local congressmen's offices and see when they will be back in town and schedule an appointment.

Meryem,

The current law is tiered to a certain extant. One to two filmmakers with minimal crew pay the $200, liability policy and ranger fees if needed.

Anything more than that and you start paying location fees for every location based on the size of your film crew and what you are needing to do.

This bill really doesn't change that other than saying if you're a crew of less than five and you're doing stuff that the public can do, we'll charge ya $200 for a permit but it will cover all the Federal lands and you're good to go for a year on all Federal lands.

By the way, the current costs mentioned above? That's just for Yellowstone.
Want to film next door in Grand Teton?

"Upon approval of the application, you must present certificate of insurance and a $100.00 permit fee. If it is deemed that a monitor (NPS employee) is to be assigned to your project, there will be a minimum fee of $154.00 per monitor for the first two hours and $50.00 per monitor per hour thereafter. A minimum of $154.00 per monitor will be charged for any assignment, including the cancellation of a given project, regardless of the reason."

I've got a call in to the Glacier National Park permit officer since they don't have permit information on their website. I imagine it's going to be pretty similar to the other two.

Want to go next door to film in Shoshone National Forest, which is beautiful by the way:

Motion Picture and Video Filming.

Daily Rate for....................Daily Rate for
Number of People____Location Each____Staging Area
1-10......................$150.....................$75
11-30.....................$250.....................$125
31-60......................$450.....................$225
61-100....................$600......................$300
over 100...................$600.....................$300

Use of Congressional or agency identified areas such as Wilderness, Research Natural Areas $150

As you can see, you can generate a pretty substantial bill in a short amount of time especially if they are a lot like Yellowstone and will stick you for every penny they can.

Do you want to film this beautiful scene at Effigy Mounds in my home state of Iowa?

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/9485/1206029927.jpg

Well, guess what? It's managed by the national park service and you're going to need a separate permit just to film there as well.

As always, if you're shooting still photographs to sell, it's completely free.

I have a call into the head ranger to find out all the fees I'll need to pay to shoot in my own backyard basically.

Kevin,

Thanks for the detailed info. on the insurance. Yes, I carry personal liability insurance but the NPS is not specifically named. My experience with permit issuance for big productions is $1million may be required for shooting on my agency's managed property (Dept. of Army) with the agency specifically named on the policy. That's probably about right for a big production. But for little old me, a one man operation, certainly overkill and not necessary. Being a long-term federal employee I have seen various policy decissions made over the years that take simple issues and make them very complex. The wording on H.R. 5502 is pretty straight forward. I hope it ends up staying that way.

You and I both Mark! :)

We're not even asking for what still photographers already have, just trying to not go bankrupt if we want to film on Federal lands.

Well, I talked with Chris Tesar, the film permit officer in Glacier to find out their requirements and fees.
They're pretty much the same as Yellowstone's.

$100 application fee
$50/hr monitoring fee $150 minimum per day.

Liability policy with the park service added as an additional insured.
PLUS, I have to add Glacier National Park as an additional insured as well so that's another $35 for that.

PLUS, the park may request that a credit line be added as well.

Looks like I'll need a second and maybe third job if I want to film on any national par, forest or BLM land. :)

Off to talk to the ranger at Effigy Mounds National Monument to see what the costs are for shooting there since it's only about an hours drive for me.

Kevin, I feel real sorry for the trouble you got over there regarding the high fees your have to pay!
If there are anything I/we (foreigners) could do to support you, I would gladly help you out!
What about put up a website where people could sign their names supporting your effort against those iniquitous rules!?

Per,

I think you could have a great impact. These permits and fees effect you as well.
If you wanted to come to the Jackson Hole Wildlife Film Festival next year and wanted to add some shooting trips to Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Park, you would be subjected to the same permit and fees as I would be.

If we're just shooting vacation video, you wouldn't have to pay a fee. But, isn't it the dream of most of us here to make a living doing this?

I've never started a grass roots movement before so I'm new at all of this.
I'd be happy to start a website, add a petition etc.

If anyone has experience in this kind of thing, shoot me an email and I'll do whatever I can to get this ball rolling to the next level.

Kevin,

Have sent out about 35 letters and e-mails and am working on a couple of ideas which if they pan out will message you later.


Mike Blumberg
http://www.arrowmakerproductions.com
Nature is the Contributor. I am an Observer of the Contributor.

Awesome Mike!

One of the things I was thinking about and don't remember if it was mentioned already is contacting the states tourism boards about this.

I mean if I can't afford to shoot in Yellowstone and Glacier, I'm certainly not going to be visiting Montana and Wyoming.

I spend money there on hotel rooms, gas, food, entertainment, gifts etc.

Kevin,

I will give this link again http://www.filmcommissionhq.com/search.jsp?dir=0&cy=US This is the site where you can find state and city film commissions. These groups are usually affiliated with the state tourism department so they want film makers to visit thier geographic area. In the drop down menu be sure to click "regional media support office" and then the state that you want.

Here is some interesting USFS film permit information which states:

Permits are not required for filming activities, such as:

· News, and gathering of news related stories.
· Other types of documentaries not requiring the use of actors, models, sets, or props.

It can be viewed at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/mthood/Filmi...lm3_Permit.htm

"Other type of documentaries" is what I and some others such as Kevin may fall under. Although I do not want to complicate things, it would be great if we could get this verbage included in HR 5502. Then, even the $200 would not be required in some instances. I plan to carry this policy with me if confronted on USFS lands.

Mark,

That's good to know.
Hopefully this bill will make it into law and we won't have to worry about if we can or can't.

Was talking to a Park Ranger just a bit ago and he said that the rules were still not finalized.

it was interesting because I told him about what went on in trying to get a permit in Yellowstone and he said that was the exact scenario he had warned his superiors would happen.

He was glad to have that information. So I told him to please talk to whomever he could and let them know what is really going on.

I will talk to him after the holiday and see if he has some contacts that I can talk to about this as well.

Always good to have a champion on the inside. :)

Kevin,
That's good to hear. As a federal employee with first hand knowledge you would be surprised how many proceedures/policies get pushed down from Washington into the field offices with little or no input from the folks that have to implement them. Its kind of scary.

So far it looks like our efforts from muti-fronts including federal park personnel, congressmen, governors, outdoor recreation groups, tourism groups and others is a good approach, but we need to keep the pressure on. Number of contacts unfortunately is what counts and not necessarily common sense.

I've been sitting at my computer whenever I have free time sending out emails.
My eyes are killing me but change doesn't come about without work and sacrifice.

Hi Mark, it looks like that Forest Service guidance is just for a specific region. When I looked for the guidance for the region I live in, it was pretty confusing with a mixture of very old guidance and links to ambiguous new guidance. Some of the districts do not have anything posted at all.

I had a very nice conversation with the film permit person for Arches and Canyonlands National Parks yesterday (in Utah). I have a business trip to the area later this year, and I will try to shoot some stock footage in the parks during my free time, if I get a chance. I told her what I was planning to do and the camera and tripod I would be using (Canon XH-A1 and smallish tripod). She said that I fall into a grey area, and I would simply look like most of the tourist photographers in the parks. Technically I should get a permit, but I would not have to apply for one. She asked me to stay off the fragile soils, avoid the crowded tourist spots where photographers cluster to capture sunset images of the most popular arches, and to keep to trails and rocks to avoid impacts to the environment.

She said I might get better service if I applied for the permit, which is only $100. Then the rangers would know where I am and what I am doing and might be able to help me with shooting if they pass me in the park. It sounds like they get a large number of two person crews during a typical month, and I don't think they require ranger escorts or anything like that for these small crews. I also got the impression that insurance isn't required for what I would be doing.

These are parks that experience a lot of filming, including Hollywood productions, and they are also favorite tourist destinations for visitors from other countries. The permit person said they used to have a waiver for small crews, but the new rules have changed this.

It's good to know some parks have a sensible approach to implementing the existing rules, but I don't think we can count on consistency without rule modifications or the passage of this new resolution.

Pat

Pat,

That's great about Arches!
I love going there and think the Moab area is my favorite second only to Yellowstone.

It's nice to see that there are some rangers who are willing to do all they can for us. The sad thing is they move around. So next year if I want to go, someone else may handle things and they may be an Yellowstone alumni and then we're screwed. :)

I think you'll really enjoy Arches. Also hit Dead Horse Point State Park if you have a chance. Great Canyonland vistas and hardly no one there. Well, I've always been in the off season so I don't know when you'll be there. :)

Let's hope the bill passes and then it'll be a non-issue if we fall into a grey area or not.

I will send emails to whoever if I can get a list of exactly who to send to and basically what to say. If I and others had a basic draft more emails would be sent out, it would save alot of time.

Hugh,

Here is a sample text you might want to use or modify. There are several links in this thread with e-mail contacts

I am encouraging you to support H.R. 5502: To amend Public Law 106-206 which provides for an annual permit fee of $200 annually for commercial filming activities on Federal land for film crews of 5 persons or fewer.

Permit fees to film on federal lands have increased significantly over the years to where it places an unreasonable financial burden on small film businesses. I film about 100 days a year and under current regulations I may have to pay thousands of dollars which is unreasonable. This concern is shared by many others who photograph and shoot video and film as both a hobby and for commercial projects on public lands. In my situation I have a small crew that attracts no more attention than other park visitors. Without adoption of reasonable fees small film businesses will not spend money for food, lodging and other associated expenditures in towns near federal parks.

I hope you will show support for H.R. 5502 which can be viewed at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5502

Pat Reddy also posted a great sample letter as well.
I'll copy and paste it below.

It's important to contact your states congressmen as many will simply ignore out of state emails which as was previously mentioned is sad because they vote on laws that effect everyone. This bill effects all filmmakers not just the ones living in their states.

Anyone who this would effect, could make a difference or could pass this on are people you should contact.

Here's Pat's letter:

The Park Service is implementing inconsistently applied rules that could affect many of your nature stock footage providers. Here is the text of an e-mail I have sent to my state representatives and various professional photographers associations about a new bill that could correct this problem. I thought I would share this with you:

"In 2000 Congress passed legislation that directed federal land managers to issue permits and collect fees for commercial still photography and filming within national parks and on federal lands. In subsequent years, the affected agencies have developed regulations to implement the mandates of this new law. I would like to call your attention to a substantial inequity in these regulations, especially the regulations that have been implemented by the National Park Service, and to ask you to support H. R. 5502 (to amend Public Law 106-206) which aims to correct these inequities.

The rules as they exist today exempt professional solo still photographers, but require a lone videographer to apply for a permit. Permit application fees are on the order of $200 per visit, and the parks have the power to charge additional fees to escort a single videographer through the park while he or she is filming. Recently a single, freelance filmmaker was told that he would have to pay as much as $4500 for a week’s worth of filming in Yellowstone National Park. Commercial still photographers who may have more equipment than a videographer, hikers, backpackers and other visitors, however, are allowed normal access to the park and trusted to observe the rules of the park without an escort.

It would seem reasonable, fair and practical for the park staff to issue a permit and trust that the videographer would observe them. I contribute money to wilderness preservation organizations, visit parks, and support their existence in part because of the wonderful work of nature videographers over the decades who have brought these places into my home. Often the best footage is that captured by the solo videographer who spends a great deal of time in the same park, knows the environment, and is able to capture footage that others simply can't. That seems to me to be a lifeline for the parks and something they should be promoting rather than discouraging. The annual incomes of freelance wildlife and nature filmmakers who work alone or with very small crews are modest at best, and the prospect of thousands of dollars of annual park fees will make it impossible for many of them to continue this work.

I would also like to call your attention to the possibility that these rules are unconstitutional, since they are arbitrary, unequally applied, and represent a possible obstruction of the constitutional protections afforded the media. It is reasonable to issue permits and charge fees when the scale of media presence in a park requires it. H. R. 5502 would correct the inequity that has been discussed by requiring that film crews of one to five in number pay for a single annual permit that would be valid on all federal lands at a cost of $200.

I urge you to support the passage of this bill and to do whatever you can to ensure that the rules for filming on national lands are fair and allow for the continued vitality of the small-scale filmmakers who provide all of us with an experience of wilderness and wilderness values that we might not otherwise have."

Regards,

Here's a link that will get you the email address of any member of Congress.
Just click on the image of the state you want,

http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

Mark posted a link for city and state film commissions:
http://www.filmcommissionhq.com/search.jsp?dir=0&cy=US

The director of tourism in the Yellowstone region of Montana:

Robin Hoover
Executive Director
Yellowstone Country Regional Tourism Commission
1-406-556-8680
yellowstone@montana.net
1820 W Lincoln
Bozeman, MT 59715

Wyoming Travel and Tourism:
http://www.wyomingtourism.org/sitetools/contact_us.php

Idaho Division of Tourism Development:
http://www.visitidaho.org/contact/

Gateway Cities Chambers of Commerce:

Bozeman. Montana:
http://www.bozemanchamber.com/form/?fid=11

Livingston, Montana:
Visitor Information Center
303 E. Park St.,
Livingston, MT 59047
406-222-0850
info@livingston-chamber.com

Gardiner, Montana:
http://www.gardinerchamber.com/contact.asp

Cooke City, Montana:
P.O. Box 1071
Cooke City, Montana 59020
(406) 838-2495
info@cookecitychamber.org

West Yellowstone, Montana:
West Yellowstone Chamber of Commerce
30 Yellowstone Avenue
P.O. Box 458
West Yellowstone, Montana, 59758
Phone: (406) 646-7701
Fax: (406) 646-9691
Email: visitorservices@westyellowstonechamber.com

Jackson, Wyoming:
For questions about area activities, attractions, and services, contact:
info@jacksonholechamber.com or 307-733-3316 continue
Our address is:
Jackson Hole Chamber of Commerce
PO Box 550
990 W. Broadway
Jackson, WY 83001

Or, you may visit:
Jackson Hole and Greater Yellowstone Visitor Center
532 North Cache
Located just a half mile north of the Town Square. Open year-round to assist you during your vacation.

Cody, Wyoming:
Cody Country Chamber of Commerce
836 Sheridan Ave.
Cody, WY 82414
(307) 587-2777
info@codychamber.org

Kimberly Jones
Executive Director
(307) 587-2777 ext. 201
exec@codychamber.org

Kathy Thompson
Event Coordinator, Buffalo Bill Art Show & Sale
(307) 587-2777 ext. 207
Direct Line (307) 587-5029
info@buffalobillartshow.com

Carri Dobbins
Event Coordinator, Buffalo Bill Art Show & Sale
(307) 587-2777 ext. 202
Direct Line (307) 587-5002
art@buffalobillartshow.com

Cathy Luthy
Business Manager
(307) 587-2777 ext. 206
business@codychamber.org

Woody Searles
Administrative Assistant
(307) 587-2777 ext. 212
admin@codychamber.org

Karen Miller
Visitor Center Coordinator
(307) 587-2777 ext. 210
cody@codychamber.org

Here is the email I sent that was mostly based around Pat's letter and response from National Park Service. The Parks response is first.
I have emailed Lee Dickinson before (I thought she was a he on a previous post here ;-)
++++++++++++++++++


Thank you for your thoughtful comments about fees for filming in National
Parks. I have forwarded your comments to Lee Dickinson, the Special Use
Permits Coordinator for the NPS in Washington. She has been hard at work on
this issue.

Thank you for your interest in the National Park Service and for taking the
time to comment on filming fees.

Joanne Blacoe
Acting Assistant Regional Director for Communications
NPS Northeast Region
200 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
215.597.0136


----- Original Message -----
From: Jacques Mersereau [jacmer@umich.edu]
Sent: 03/16/2008 04:02 PM AST
To: <TBWheeler@aol.com>; <lawyer@nppa.org>; <advocacy@nppa.org>;
<dgroves@ppa.com>; <contact@nanpa.org>;
<fbutler@nanpa.org>; <info@nanpa.org>;
Subject: Independent Wildlife Videography Fee for taping in National
Parks



Hello to you all,

My name is Jacques Mersereau and I am an independent filmmaker who
specializes in producing nature documentaries.
I write you today to ask you to consider my viewpoint regarding upcoming
changes in National Park
policies concerning videotaping on National Park lands and to urge you to
support H.R. 5502 which will amend
Public Law 106-206.

In 2000 Congress passed legislation that directed federal land managers to
issue permits and collect fees
for commercial still photography and filming within national parks and on
federal lands. In subsequent years,
the affected agencies have developed regulations to implement the mandates
of this new law. I would like to
call your attention to a substantial inequity in these regulations,
especially the regulations that have been
implemented by the National Park Service.

The rules as they exist today exempt professional solo still photographers,
but require a lone videographer to
apply for a permit. Permit application fees are on the order of $200 per
visit, and the parks have the power to
charge additional fees to escort a single videographer through the park
while he or she is filming. Recently a
single, freelance filmmaker was told that he would have to pay as much as
$4500 for a week’s worth of filming
in Yellowstone National Park. Commercial still photographers who may have
more equipment than a videographer,
hikers, backpackers and other visitors, however, are allowed normal access
to the park and trusted to observe the
rules of the park without an escort.

It would seem reasonable, fair and practical for the park staff to issue a
permit and trust that the videographer
would observe them. I contribute money to wilderness preservation
organizations, visit parks, and support their
Existence. This is because of the wonderful nature documentaries produced
over the years.
Often the best footage is that captured by the solo videographer who spends
a great
deal of time in the same park, knows the environment, and is able to
capture footage that others simply can't.
Although the film my wife and I produced, “AN OSPREY HOMECOMING’ won an
Emmy Award, we have yet to see a
profit, and in fact, it is highly unlikely we will ever recoup our out of
pocket costs. http://www.anopsreyhomecoming.com/

Therefore, it is reasonable to issue permits and charge fees that take a
single independent and unfunded videographer’s situation
into consideration. H. R. 5502 would correct this gross inequity by
requiring that film crews of one to five in number pay for a single
annual permit that would be valid on all federal lands at a cost of $200.

I urge you to support the passage of this bill and to do whatever you can
to ensure that the rules for filming on national
lands are fair and allow for the continued vitality of the small-scale
filmmakers who bring wilderness and wildlife into America’s
Living rooms and who help educate the public as they help to promote our
great National Park system.

Sincerely,

Jacques Mersereau

Jacques,

Thanks for sending the letter!

I've tried to talk with Lee many times and she's never responded to any of my emails.

Maybe if they get enough people complaining about the fee structure, they'll revisit it.
Course, if the bill passes that exempts us from everything but a yearly permit that covers all Federal lands then that's even better. :)

I agree that all those who want to film in the National Parks should
send emails to Lee. Considerate emails with constructive ideas have
a chance of getting through. I would rather not have to pay to
videotape as we taxpayers are supposed to be owners of the Parks, but
I also know they are under attack by those who would love to exploit
the natural resources, pay only a token amount and try to paint themselves
as the Park's saviors.
Part of that argument is the genuine need the Parks have for additional
revenue during "these times". Maybe working together we can achieve
a win win solution for us and the Park system.

Talked to my NPS counter-part for the Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area. He agree that there was a real inequity here. Appearantly there was some kind of internal audit a couple of years ago where Dept. of Interior got hit hard on not charging appropriate fees for filming on public lands. He would not elaborate further but did state that what we were asking for sounded reasonable. Anyway he confirmed that Lee Dickinson was the person to contact with NPS at lee_dickinson@nps.gov

I will work on an e-mail tonite.

Disabled Veterans and the National Park Service
 

A recent request at Yellowstone National Park for a permit to shoot video using a single camera was responded to by rangers with confusing answers including permit fees and insurance fees along with having to have a ranger present. When ask about still photography no permit was required.

The group of 4, 20% to 70% disabled veterans who shoot nature video for stock and DVD release ask why and was given confusing answers. Such as you might get in trouble out there, these veterans are all Special Forces Trained with combat experience from Viet Nam and probably know more then the rangers about survival.

The question now being ask by Veterans Groups is if the veterans which were rejected and not allowed to shoot because of permit costs and ranger requirements and have paid the price to have parks in this country, who want to make a living shooting video are rejected by the Park Service who thinks of them as a major productions companies instead of individual, making it impossible for them to earn a living, then the stories of how the Park Service treat individual producers are true.

Or is this a case of discrimination toward disabled veterans?

Letters from Veterans groups to congress are now asking that questions, as the group was allowed to shoot in several National Parks on the East Cost and in Utah, but not Yellowstone proving there is no consistent policy or procedure and discrimination is a strong possibility.

A proposed change in the existing law could change that if it passes allowing a yearly charge for single team camera crew to shoot on all Federal Controlled land including National Parks, for a fee of $200.00.

Veterans groups are asking for the immediate passage of the proposed changes to the law, and warning Congress and Park Service of the backlash that could occur from veterans in support of disabled veterans just trying to make a living if the law is not changed.


Mike Blumberg
Arrow Maker Productions
http://www.arrowmakerproductions.com

Nature is the Contributor. I am an Observer of the Contributor.

Seems like Yellowstone is the big problem so far.

I know it was like going into a brick wall at 90mph. :)

I'll have to talk to my dad as he's heavily involved in Veteran affairs.

Nice to have the Vets on our side on this.

I'll keep on plugging away on my end.

From the following site http://www.yellowstone.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=18605

"I spoke with a gentlemen from CNN that has a crew here shooting footage for a special airing on Friday night. It's going to be on the delisting, which occurs officially on Friday. ......"

Kevin, it would be interesting to find out from this person if CNN actually had "paid" ranger observers , for this shoot.

By the way the video is on the CNN site and also Friday night at 10 also in reference to the wolves delisting.

Tom,

I sent Kevin ( the guy in the post ) a message about it. I'll let you know if I hear from him.

Thanks for the post!

I did not read all six pages of posts, but the truth of the matter is that we have been conditioned to be willing to pay taxes just because we're told it's necessary and acceptable to do so. Taxes, such as these "fees" for shooting in a National Park, should be fought by the people at every turn.

We need to remember who the "government" really is. The people--you and me--are the government. They are our parks, not the government's! The people, individually, should be able to enjoy the parks in any way they see fit as long as their "enjoyment" is not causing any damage or threat to any thing or anyone in any way. A lone videographer with a tripod and camera has neither direct nor indirect impact on the environment. So why the fee (tax)?

By all means, fight this legislation and get it overturned!