USFS "DO I NEED TO SAY MORE"

[jog]

http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2014/09/forest_service_says_media_need.html#incart_m-rpt-1

[h=1]Forest Service says media needs photography permit in wilderness areas, alarming First Amendment advocates[/h]

First Amendment advocates are alarmed by a U.S. Forest Service policy requiring journalists to get a permit to shoot videos in federal wilderness areas including those on Mount Hood. (The Oregonian/2013)
Print
By Rob Davis | [email][email protected][/email]
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on September 23, 2014 at 5:46 PM, updated September 23, 2014 at 7:08 PM

1

Reddit

The U.S. Forest Service has tightened restrictions on media coverage in vast swaths of the country's wild lands, requiring reporters to pay for a permit and get permission before shooting a photo or video in federally designated wilderness areas.
Under rules being finalized in November, a reporter who met a biologist, wildlife advocate or whistleblower alleging neglect in any of the nation's 100 million acres of wilderness would first need special approval to shoot photos or videos even on an iPhone.
Permits cost up to $1,500, says Forest Service spokesman Larry Chambers, and reporters who don't get a permit could face fines up to $1,000.
First Amendment advocates say the rules ignore press freedoms and are so vague they'd allow the Forest Service to grant permits only to favored reporters shooting videos for positive stories.
"It's pretty clearly unconstitutional," said Gregg Leslie, legal defense director at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in Alexandria, Va. "They would have to show an important need to justify these limits, and they just can't."
Liz Close, the Forest Service's acting wilderness director, says the restrictions have been in place on a temporary basis for four years and are meant to preserve the untamed character of the country's wilderness.
Close didn't cite any real-life examples of why the policy is needed or what problems it's addressing. She didn't know whether any media outlets had applied for permits in the last four years.
She said the agency was implementing the Wilderness Act of 1964, which aims to protect wilderness areas from being exploited for commercial gain.
"It's not a problem, it's a responsibility," she said. "We have to follow the statutory requirements."
The Forest Service's previous rules caused a fuss in 2010, when the agency refused to allow an Idaho Public Television crew into a wilderness area to film student conservation workers. The agency ultimately caved to pressure from Idaho Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter.
With smartphones blurring the lines between reporters and camera crews, U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, said the agency should tread more carefully.
"The Forest Service needs to rethink any policy that subjects noncommercial photographs and recordings to a burdensome permitting process for something as simple as taking a picture with a cell phone," Wyden said. "Especially where reporters and bloggers are concerned, this policy raises troubling questions about inappropriate government limits on activity clearly protected by the First Amendment."
Most of the country's wilderness is in the West. Nearly 50 wilderness areas have been designated in Oregon, including wide stretches of land around Mount Hood, Mount Jefferson and Mount Washington.
The rules allow exceptions only for breaking news coverage of events like fires and rescues. They're more stringent than similar policies on wilderness areas managed by a different federal agency, the Bureau of Land Management.
The BLM does not require any special permit for newsgathering in wilderness areas.
By contrast, the Forest Service is giving its supervisors discretion to decide whether a news outlet's planned video or photo shoots would meet the Wilderness Act's goals.
"If you were engaged on reporting that was in support of wilderness characteristics, that would be permitted," Close said.
The First Amendment prohibits the creation of laws that abridge press freedom. Asked whether the Forest Service believes its rule violates the First Amendment, Close replied: "It does not apply to breaking news."
Reporters have many more reasons to go into wilderness areas, however, than just to cover fires, rescues or other breaking events.
The Forest Service is currently accepting public comment on its proposal. Those interested can comment online here.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[KiddoTheMiner]

are you serious?

12 year olds could run the public lands better

 

[jog]

You have my vote!

 

[Hefty1]

USFS...Under Stupid Forest Supervisors.

 

[Tonto]

I find it appropriate that the Feds have finally aggravated an institution that can shed light on the draconian tactics used to keep us from using our public lands. Only the press and media can shed the appropriate light on this subject. The permits required to exercise their 1st Amendment rights are no different than the permits, fees, and over-regulation that have been plaguing miners, fisherman, hunters, and cattlemen for a long time. Apparently the 4th estate has arrived. Hopefully, it will snowball into some help for the rest of our rights to use public lands. I'm not holding my breath....

 

[Hoser John]

Actually this insanity was started on the national Geographic magazine shoots in different areas. SICK MAN SICK-

 

[ivan salis]

the 1964 act was to avoid folks from taking "public land" resources away for private gain -- like say --a lumber company "logging" the trees for free in a public wilderness area then selling the product --not taking pictures or writing stories --about the wilderness areas * (which phyiscally "take" nothing from the area )

 

[Tonto]

Ah, yes..the Spotted Owl lie. I doubt if there were any trees cut for free since there are fees that were paid by the lumber contractors to harvest the trees. Apparently, the amount of money being paid to the government wasn't much in the big picture, and, heaven forbid, people were earning money from the federal lands. Good stewardship is one thing. Completely closing federal lands is another. As a miner, it is absolutely ridiculous that areas where people can mine enough to earn a living without ruining the environment are closed in the interest of "protecting" it. The only thing being protected here are the ideals of socialists who would rather prevent the earning of a living by people who pay taxes to support the lands than allow a dollar to be earned.
Why is there never any mention of the fact that the lumber industry provided jobs while spending millions on equipment, fuel, etcetera, which also created jobs. It is exactly the same with the oil industry today. Since California placed the moratorium on dredging based on the lie that it harms fish habitat, many small businesses that support that part of the mining industry have gone out of business. What is the real reason for the closing of public lands? I postulate that it is to prevent us from earning a dollar from a resource that nature worshipers think is somehow unfair. Those same religious fanatics (nature worshipers) never give a thought to the fact that the economy is supported by those miners when they sell their metals, purchase equipment, and pay taxes. This also helps provide welfare programs, food stamps, education, and medical care; all the while protecting and enhancing the environment so long as regulations are adhered to. When an industry, such as logging, is shut down by these religious zealots, another off shore industry is created for a foreign government to supply hose commodities we no longer have the power to provide for ourselves. (Please don't tell me that the Japanese floating lumber mills weren't a direct result of the closing of lumber mills on shore in the northwest.) Taking pictures for money is not a violation of any natural laws, does not harm the environment, allows people who don't have the means to see it in person to see it at home, and supports the economy. What's the downside? Tree hugging, dirt worshipers don't like it because they aren't the ones getting the dollar. The danger to them is that people at home might decide to actually visit the area after seeing the pictures.

 

[goldenIrishman]

Once again we have even more proof that the Universally Stupid Forest Supervisors want the public lands all for themselves. That they think they can ignore the laws and our constitution just goes to show how stupid they really are. Their view of the law is such that they think they can twist them to their own bennefit and in this case they run a very high risk of waking a sleeping giant against them. The media may not always report things correctly by spinning a story to make it more "interesting" but in this case I think we'll be getting the whole truth out of them. I'd love to see some gutsy reporter refuse to get their silly permit and have it end up in court if for no other reason than to bring all this to light for the publilc at large.

Taking pictures or shooting video in no way "Takes" from the forest. If it did, then hunders of thousands of vacationers would be open to being fined. This misinterpeteration of the laws only serves one thing.... To line the pockets of the USFS with more money from the people.

 

[fowledup]

The media won't expose anything. They're going to cut a sweetheart deal with the Circus whereas the Forest Circus will get to pre-screen and approve all media, especially news feeds (remember the standoff last year?). The government wheel moves slightly faster then the rust grasping at it, they've been working on this awhile!

 

[timberjack]

Has anyone ever sat down and tried to total the lost reveneu from closing down logging (and as a result how many acres have gone up in flames-cost of fighting fires where thinning the woods would have prevented fires)-trying to halt mining and no water for ag. Because it was flushed for fish? Im a little surprised i have never seen a comercial for common sense on our lands,,,great picture -viedo oppertunity,,,fires raging, water blasting out of resivoirs, parched prime ag lands, unemploied workers,,,,and a chart showing the cost plus a chart of how well fish populations have recovered since the bulk of these unhelpful restrictions have been put in place. There has been a huge swing in the wrong direction in the managment of our land..and i think if the public was made aware things might start to change...but we all have to picth in....imho

 

[jog]

timberjack
Sounds like you have a great idea, take it & run with it.....

 

[IMPDLN]

Speaking of spotted owl......same B.S. is happening again now in Az. with the Mexican grey wolf. They reintroduced the wolf and now want to expand their range and just like the spotted owl B.S. put a stop to logging, the wolf issue is just a back door approach to get rid of the last few cattle ranchers. Also likely a way to close more of our national forests to access by people.

Logging, cattle ranching, and mining is what put Az. on the map. The environmental movement in this country has killed every town in northern Az. and turned them into worthless tourist traps. No work, no industry.......worthless destruction of productive people. What this country needs is a revolution. Dennis

 

[timberjack]

But the problem is we re in the minority..99% of the people i know are living their version of the american dream to some degree..wether its working nonstop and taking care of the kids or living off of public assistance, or somewhere in between,,they are caught up in their lives and dont have time or want to think too far past that next check,,,,you have to show the population why it is important to manage what is all of ours to achive a diffrent result. I am shocked when i stumble into a political conversation with someone and they will start whinning about a certin topic and i ask "what have you done to try to change the problem? 99.9% of the time the answer is nothing....look at the "greening" of the u.s. since 1960,,,how things have changed,,how did they change?? Public preception,,t.v. adds,,news programs,, college professors,,high school teachers all drilling the left wing line....until now we are at a point where you have to get premission and pay a fee to take a picture of one of our mountians!!!!!
A revolution? Sure, in the thought process,,common sense is what we need,, public suppourt is what we need,,marketing.......seems like those in calif. Have the most examples of how the policies of our govt. Has spoiled so much...blows my mind that there is not more push back to fed policies out there..MARKETING-preception is everything,

 

[Armchair prospector]

Until these takings go full circle, meaning that no one has any rights, will people wake up. By then it will be to late. Wake up you liberals , you are cutting off you nose despite your face. I agree with you Timber except public assistance is not the American Dream.

 

[calisdad]

I aw this and shook my head the other day. They don't want the media showing what's really going on and painting them in an unfavorable color so they reserve the privilege (almost said 'right' but they have no rights) of censorship. Put a price tag on it to keep the workload down. Maybe it's time for Ken Burns to do a documentary on the USFS. One that tells where we are, where we are going and what would happen if they just did the job they are commissioned to do without the current 'lock everyone out' agenda.

If we ever needed an example of "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely" this is it.

 

[Tonto]

Until these takings go full circle, meaning that no one has any rights, will people wake up. By then it will be to late. Wake up you liberals , you are cutting off you nose despite your face. I agree with you Timber except public assistance is not the American Dream.

I think Timberjack meant that those people who are on welfare have enjoyed the American dream, even though they don't have to work for it. To them, it's a dream come true to get something for nothing.

 

[timberjack]

That was what i was trying to say..not my idea of the amarican dream either,,,but some people are always looking for something for nothing.

 

[UncleMatt]

U.S. Forest Service says photo permits saga misunderstood | Reuters

 

[timberjack]

Results of public pushback..