$1000 FINE for taking PICTURES or VIDEO on National Park Land

I guess that is what you get for the way you treat each other.

ie all the homeless vets/troops that you "support".

makes sense, with all the people vanishing from national park lands, they don't want you taking pics of green men and their vehicles

Surely your National Parks are of historic significance and the most beautiful places in your country!? Pretty orwellian. There must be something youre not allowed to document

Ha to late Marland already has a flush tax.

luckily, they backed off

[link to www.esquire.com]

that would have been nuts!

This.

More people are abducted from the wilds than anywhere else. They also have DUMB entrances out there. This is the best way to discourage people from eventually discovering these things.

These people have absolutely lost their minds.. what the hell are they going to do next? Ban books by Ansel Adams?
This will kill tourism in some areas. This place is getting too much like the damn Hunger Games. What's next build a big fence like in the Hunger Games to keep us in small areas?
I have a national park just a few miles from where I live and now the leaf people come in hoards to snap the fall colors. This is when my area makes money.

I am seriously waiting for that special someone who will get fined and have an after thought of... You know what, I am gonna. Ah never mind, people are way too pussified!

Here's a link to make a comment on this proposed ruling. Enough people have commented that they have seemingly relented, as mentioned by another poster, but it's a great website for informed citizens to watch.

[link to www.regulations.gov]

Remember last year when they CLOSED THE PARKS?

Some CT people said they were preping and stocking up.

HOW CAN THEY FINE ME FOR TAKING PICTURES OF MY OWN PROPERTY?

astonished but not. picture taking on scenic vacations has been customary. wth reason could they have for this? prob simply to be nazis and overturn a time honored tradition.

This would be under the same category as taking pics of cops constitutionally. A gov agency just need a bat bitch slap up side the head.

Hey Goofballs!! That fine is for commercial filming only. Ya'll running around acting like you'd get fined for taking vacation photos. TARDS

Only because you let them.........fuuuuuuuck themmmmmm.

Obama's abusively *HIGH TAXES*

Americans better wake the fuck up and soon because we came here to get away from taxation without representation.

idiots

copyright your house facade and roof, your face and whole body and sue the hell out of them

So if I want to sell my photography taken on public land I can be fined for it? Fuck them. I do a lot of astrophotography, a lot of it is taken from public land where it's nice and dark. Usually not US Forest Service land, but sometimes it is. Generally I don't try to sell it, but once in a while someone will ask to buy the rights to use my photography in their production. Now I could be looking at a massive fine if I dare to sell it? Oh, they backed off for now, but that's no guarantee they won't try this shit again in the future. And if not the US Forest Service specifically then probably some other power-hungry agency like the National Park Service. And are they even really backing off? They say they'll "clarify" the proposal so that it doesn't impact the media or private individuals.
[link to www.washingtonpost.com]
So what if I have a friend with me assisting me or using an additional telescope next to me? Will we count as a "film crew" as opposed to an "individual" under their rules then? The answer is simple, I will not comply.

Ah, here are the details on the new proposal:
"Specifically, this policy provides the criteria used to evaluate request for special use permits related to still photography and commercial filming in congressionally designated wilderness areas."
[link to www.federalregister.gov (secure)]
Oh but don't worry, nanny state says it won't have a major impact on anything on anyone:
"The proposed directive has been reviewed under USDA procedures and Executive Order 12866 on regulatory planning and review. It has been determined that this is not an economically significant action. This action will not have an annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy, nor will it adversely affect productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health and safety, or State or local governments. This proposed directive will not interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency, nor will it raise new legal or policy issues. Finally the proposed directive will not alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grant, user fee, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of beneficiaries of those programs."
Oh, and they're backing off, as long as your photos were for "news gathering purposes." But you better not be taking photos for art purposes that you could make money from!