Yeah! I sure hope so! So many you tubers are afraid to film in any parks. The permit even says 0-1 people for the permit. It’s a very self contradictory issue. Many you tubers just won’t post in fear of being fined. So sad.
This permit thing has been floating around since I first got into photography in the 90's. It was confusing and vague then, and it still is today. Probably even more so. They really need to clarify and finalize it and then educate the public on what's really going on! Too many opinions, falsehoods, and differences in the policies are floating around. A lot of the time, even rangers aren't fully informed on what the actual procedures are and all the changes that have been made through the decades, and that makes that job even harder. But the last I heard, and the way I understand it, is that if you are non-profit, you are basically in the clear. As long as you aren't doing anything to "Disrupt the natural or everyday workings of the park". No filming crews, no wild off-roading or tearing up natural stuff, no blocking roads, etc. I think this confusion comes from the fact that so many businesses DO use the parks for profit. (Commercial guides, tour groups, etc., not to mention mining, logging, and other extractions) This is the government's way of attempting to recover lost funds (Because natural resources are usually one of the first budgets to get cut). They are forced to put everyone in the same boat as far as permitting. The problem is that not everyone is the same, and this is where all the confusion is. Also, keep in mind that it's not just Natl. Parks. It's pretty much all public lands. Some more than others. Natl. Parks are more visible because more visitation equals more incidents of violations or miscommunications. Other public lands are usually a lot more loose on the subject. It also depends a lot on if they can even prove where something was filmed/photographed. Obviously, the Grand Canyon is undeniable, but a closeup of wildlife of flora is less specific. The question I've always had is what if at the time of filming/photographing, you were doing it just for fun, but later are approached buy someone that wants to buy your photo? How does that classify? Would someone have to pay for past work by the ever-changing policies and fees? Does the estate of Ansel Adams owe a buttload of money to the National Park Service, even though his photographs pretty much promoted their visitation AND conservation? My "opinion" is to just go and do what you love and don't worry about it. Of course if you get fined, I completely deny any responsibility! Lol! On a side note, since Cheeseburger is a mocking bird, he's probably just imitating a chickadee he heard one time. In fact, most of those calls he's making are calls from other bird species. That's what mocking birds do! Have a great day Kari! Don't get fined!
That would be an awesome for you to do. Yes it does seem as long as I’m not impeding or using footage for ads then I should be okay using my amendment right. I’ll fight it to the end! Lol
I believe the permits are for for-profit disruptive filming and activities. If one is filming with personal intent while not being disruptive, destructive or a nuisance to others. I believe that is a free speech right... Facebook was the one in breach of contract not the person filming it for personal use, I would get a lawyer and go after Facebook for any damages
Sounds like the permit thing is just for commercial film crews, but I'm no lawyer! Anyway, happy Easter! Say hi to Cheeseburger for me!
Yeah! I sure hope so! So many you tubers are afraid to film in any parks. The permit even says 0-1 people for the permit. It’s a very self contradictory issue. Many you tubers just won’t post in fear of being fined. So sad.
This permit thing has been floating around since I first got into photography in the 90's. It was confusing and vague then, and it still is today. Probably even more so. They really need to clarify and finalize it and then educate the public on what's really going on! Too many opinions, falsehoods, and differences in the policies are floating around. A lot of the time, even rangers aren't fully informed on what the actual procedures are and all the changes that have been made through the decades, and that makes that job even harder. But the last I heard, and the way I understand it, is that if you are non-profit, you are basically in the clear. As long as you aren't doing anything to "Disrupt the natural or everyday workings of the park". No filming crews, no wild off-roading or tearing up natural stuff, no blocking roads, etc. I think this confusion comes from the fact that so many businesses DO use the parks for profit. (Commercial guides, tour groups, etc., not to mention mining, logging, and other extractions) This is the government's way of attempting to recover lost funds (Because natural resources are usually one of the first budgets to get cut). They are forced to put everyone in the same boat as far as permitting. The problem is that not everyone is the same, and this is where all the confusion is. Also, keep in mind that it's not just Natl. Parks. It's pretty much all public lands. Some more than others. Natl. Parks are more visible because more visitation equals more incidents of violations or miscommunications. Other public lands are usually a lot more loose on the subject. It also depends a lot on if they can even prove where something was filmed/photographed. Obviously, the Grand Canyon is undeniable, but a closeup of wildlife of flora is less specific. The question I've always had is what if at the time of filming/photographing, you were doing it just for fun, but later are approached buy someone that wants to buy your photo? How does that classify? Would someone have to pay for past work by the ever-changing policies and fees? Does the estate of Ansel Adams owe a buttload of money to the National Park Service, even though his photographs pretty much promoted their visitation AND conservation? My "opinion" is to just go and do what you love and don't worry about it. Of course if you get fined, I completely deny any responsibility! Lol! On a side note, since Cheeseburger is a mocking bird, he's probably just imitating a chickadee he heard one time. In fact, most of those calls he's making are calls from other bird species. That's what mocking birds do! Have a great day Kari! Don't get fined!
Agreed🦉
That would be an awesome for you to do. Yes it does seem as long as I’m not impeding or using footage for ads then I should be okay using my amendment right. I’ll fight it to the end! Lol
I believe the permits are for for-profit disruptive filming and activities.
If one is filming with personal intent while not being disruptive, destructive or a nuisance to others. I believe that is a free speech right...
Facebook was the one in breach of contract not the person filming it for personal use, I would get a lawyer and go after Facebook for any damages
Thanks for your input! I truly appreciate it! I do agree with you! And that’s how it should be!