The U.S. Forest Service Is Backing Off Its $1,000 Fine For Photos In The Forest

Esquire – by Eric Vilas-Boas

The U.S. Forest Service, one of the four agencies which oversees wilderness areas in the United States, is backing off the language in proposed rules that would require members of the media to have a permit to photograph or shoot video in the 36 million acres of wilderness areas it oversees.

When readers of the original reports in The Oregonian and Esquire.com saw the potential fine—$1,000—the story went viral, and the agency scrambled to clarify its stance.  

“The U.S. Forest Service remains committed to the First Amendment,” the agency’s chief, Tom Tidwell, said in a statement. “To be clear, provisions in the draft directive do not apply to news gathering or activities.”

Journalists, the Tidwell says, are safe. You don’t have to pay the Forest Service $1,500 for a permit to take a photo in a forest. And they won’t fine you $1,000 if you’re caught without one. Whew.

And while it seems like the Forest Service has pulled a 180, it’s time for the agency to put its money where its mouth is. This isn’t the first time the Forest Service has had permitting problems, even when news organizations are concerned. And the language differentiating between commercial productions and news-gathering hasn’t been clarified (yet), which is what journalists and First Amendment watchdogs would like to see happen:

“If they’re serious about it, they need to craft unambiguous language that exempts news-gathering if that’s their alleged intent, so there’s no question that someone out on a news story wouldn’t have a ranger or other employee saying ‘You need a permit’,” Osterreicher said.

Here’s the stance from the Forest Service: The proposed rules were intended to prevent unnecessary damage to the ecosystem and wildlife therein. No environmentally conscious person wants that, not photographers who have shot these places for years, and presumably not the Forest Service overseeing them. Here’s where agency’s statements on Tuesday, reported by The Oregonian‘s Rob Davis, told a slightly different story—one about which stories you’re allowed to tell about the forest:

“If you were engaged on reporting that was in support of wilderness characteristics, that would be permitted,” Close said.

She acknowledged that reporters shooting videos, even on iPhones, would need special permits. 

That last sentence is what sparked a firestorm. Even some Republican politicians read the story and got in on the condemnations.

Here’s to hoping the agency, responsible for collective acreage the size of Iowa, sees this as an opportunity. They’ve given themselves an extra month to field comments from the public—and there are many. Here’s one we can add:

“The public lands become the way by which we know we are democratic. We own them.” The man who said that was Char Miller, biographer of Gifford Pinchot, the first chief of the United States Forest Service. It comes from the documentary The Greatest Good, the film made for the agency’s centennial.

Everyone can win here. Photos by the likes of Ansel Adams and documentaries by the likes of Ken Burns have shown time and again the power of the American wilderness and the power of the visual medium to tell that story. And every citizen should have the right to tell uncomfortable stories, too, like this one, or this one, or this one. Or the story of Bigfoot.

Just, please, leave the place the way you found it. Or better.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/news/forest-service-backing-off-fine