Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Proposed Fee Schedule for Commercial Filming and Still Photography Permits

Kennan Ward

Kennan Ward

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
525
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Tent, Worldwide.
Website
www.kennanward.com
Mo' money... At this rate, the day is rapidly approaching where we'll have to buy a permit just to purchase a camera.
 
Shooting video for anything other than personal use (vacation video) Yellowstone used to be a $200 fee to file an application, million dollar liability policy naming the NPS as an additional insured, itinerary for each day in the park filed in advance, and requirement to pay for a park ranger to monitor the production while in the park (billed at $65/hr).

Still photography in Yellowstone: No fees or permits. Flip your VDSLR over to motion capture? See above.

I suppose this is more equal. Everyone gets to pay now. Some pay less, some pay more...
 
I think the most amazing thing is that this process started in Dec 2000... 13 years to do this rather simple thing. Really? Any wonder why most of us have so little respect for the government.

They all probably spent more time and money talking about this than they will collect in the next 13 years.

I think they need to add a yearly fee for 1-3 persons which covers all Federal Land. Say $1,000.00 or even $1,500.00. That would make it much easier for the many folks like Kennan.
 
While I'm not in favor of the fees personally, I have been told by some park people that it "keeps the riff raff out". Which I kind of understand. All too often people take advantage of public offerings to the point where it pollutes the space. The fees actually seem quite reasonable for the amount of work that is involved in trying to enforce them and collect the fee. If you consider the amount of time and money that goes into this stuff, its obviously just offsetting a much larger figure. I also like the suggestion of charging a flat yearly fee for folks like Kennan who shoot there all the time.
 
We all ready have these fees and paperwork needed to do professional work in the parks.
Why don't they charge everyone who has a camera that goes in to the park a nominal fee and that way everyone pays? I think they have forgotten that one of the main reasons people want to go to national parks is because they saw a film or photos in a magazine or in a documentary.
I get it you need to have some form of accountability but these fees seem so random...

I do like the idea of a reasonable one time for the year fee for all National Parks... for unlimited use, but you would have to fill out a info sheet on you and your intended usages.

In todays day and age of high quality images from cameras that almost anyone can acquire, it seems to me very difficult to determine and in force, what the intended images from the cameras are for professional or personal images.

If your a large production you will do the necessary work to fill out forms and pay fees etc etc etc to be there. The issue starts when you are a smaller group or just by your self getting some work done.

I have on occasion been approached by park people and in my view, singled out because I had a "nice" camera or a "expensive looking" camera. While the guy 10 feet down from where I was taking some personal pix was obviously working on a project but he didn't have the same professional looking gear as me. So he was never approached, Needless to say there was a very lengthy conversation about why they picked me and my gear verses anyone else taking pictures in that area that day.

One last rant and then Ill finish.
I worked TV news for a good number of years and I never could understand how the news organizations got to shoot anywhere or almost any thing just because it was titled news. Seems now in this day of entertaining news that these fees and permits should apply unless its a emergency or breaking news event and even then it could be determined if it continues over days that there needs to be some sort of fees paid. Other wise news organization could just go shoot entire programs under the News umbrella of because its a news organization there doesnt need to be any fees. I don't know if this has changed from when I worked news but I hope so.
 
These numbers don't seem all that bad to me when it comes to permits. Plenty of private places that will charge you a heck of a lot more.
Parks are all underfunded and they have to get the money from somewhere, can't blame them.
We don't even have money to re-build old bridges so how can a park hope to stay afloat? We Americans love fighting against paying taxes and love getting into overseas conflicts that cost us tons of money and then we wonder why parks can't keep their gates open...
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/17/travel/national-parks-budget-cuts
 
I agree with many of Russ' concerns above. I encourage everyone to submit commentary about the proposed fees. My own concerns, which I did voice in comments to the posted email address, were about the somewhat arbitrary wording of what constitutes "more than a tripod," i.e. if you have a steadicam but no tripod, what is the fee schedule? If you have a tripod PLUS a boom pole, is that MORE than a tripod? What do you pay with the boom pole but without the tripod? Just seems silly to do it that way. I think the crew size limits make some sense but there is room for ambiguity there as well. Personally, I'd just rather not be arguing with the ranger about stuff like this because I assume he will win, even if he is wrong.

I like the idea of a simple, affordable, relevant fee schedule so I can shoot in confidence knowing I won't get hassled.
 
My experience is that using an attached microphone draws attention like nothing else. I got severely hassled while on vacation in Yellowstone using a prosumer camera with an attached shotgun because it "looked expensive". I told the ranger that's the only camera I have, so he finally backed off. Meanwhile a guy with a $8K DSLR and $15K lens standing next to me clicked away unfettered. Selective enforcement is the norm today, will this continue under the new rules?
What does "more than" camera and tripod mean? Would a video camera + tripod + microphone = $10 or $75?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top