Feds Want To Restrict Filming In Wilderness Areas

Share

When will the American population abandon their apathy in exchange for action? When is enough, enough? What kind of population would accept being told what they can film in a public wilderness area? Will they next tell us it’s illegal to film the skies? From the utter insanity of global climate engineering to ridiculous laws like the one proposed below, the criminal cabal of power that runs the country is pulling the noose around our collective necks. The public must begin to document and hold responsible all elected officials and employees of agencies that carry out the tyranny. The responsibility of taking a stand belongs to all of us.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org

Feds Want To Restrict Filming In Wilderness Areas

By Zach Urness
Source: Statesman Journal

Statement from Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), on Forest Service rules under permanent consideration:

“The Wilderness Act was passed to protect and preserve irreplaceable natural wonders for Americans today and for future generations. This proposed rule is vague and could have a major impact on the way the media captures, documents, and promotes our public lands. What does the Forest Service plan to do next—monitor Instagram accounts and fine users that post pictures of our wilderness areas? In the coming days, I will organize and send the Forest Service a bipartisan letter telling them the current rule is unacceptable and that it needs to be fixed. Members of the press should be allowed to access and photograph these public lands, without a dictate on how they use the footage from bureaucrats in Washington, DC.”

DeFazio, Wyden decry plan to restrict wilderness filming

——————–

The U.S. Forest Service has proposed a set of rules that would strictly limit filming and photography in federal wilderness areas by media companies, commercial outfitters, nonprofit groups and even, potentially, members of the general public.

The directive, which has been on the books for 48 months but hasn’t been enforced, is intended to tighten restrictions on people and organizations that derive commercial gain or seek to raise funds through images taken within the 36 million acres of wilderness area managed by the Forest Service.

The proposed rules would require newspaper photographers, television producers or filmmakers to obtain a special use permit before entering a wilderness area — unless they were covering “breaking news.” A Forest Service supervisor would then determine whether the story has merit under the criteria of the directive.

STATESMANJOURNAL

Exploring 50 years of Wilderness Act’s impact on Oregon

The special use permit could be denied, raising First Amendment concerns. The permit would also cost upwards of $1,500 and bring a $1,000 fine to anyone caught breaking the rule.

“The Wilderness Act pretty clearly prohibits commercial enterprise in wilderness areas,” said Liz Close, Acting Director of Wilderness for the U.S. Forest Service, who added that the rules are meant to preserve the “untamed” character of wilderness areas.

A loose version of the rules have been around in the past, Forest Service officials said. A proposal to film a commercial for an SUV in the Mount Jefferson Wilderness would always have been denied, for example. Even advertisements for REI’s most recent tent would likely need to be filmed outside wilderness boundaries.

Close said the current directive was intended to create a uniform set of rules and eliminate confusion.

“Some of our decision makers were having trouble determining how to permit some activities,” she said.

The problem, say critics, is the Forest Service has taken that idea and applied it overzealously.

STATESMANJOURNAL

How the Wilderness Act changed Oregon (and America)

It would apply to a rafting company that wanted to make a video showcasing a trip through the Wild Rogue Wilderness. It may also apply to a hobbyist photographer who took a picture within the Diamond Peak Wilderness and wanted to sell a print online.

Forest Service officials gave conflicting answers about whether photography would require a special use permit, but the official language of the directive includes photography.

Far more troubling to some is the prospect of journalists being denied access to a wilderness area because a government agency didn’t approve of a story idea.

“On the one hand I really do understand what they are trying to do — if you have a huge crew filming a movie or commercial on wilderness land, it can have a very negative impact,” said Steve Bass, Oregon Public Broadcasting President and CEO, whose company produces the popular television show Oregon Field Guide.

“But the government can’t determine what’s news and not news – it’s a pretty clear violation of the First Amendment.”

The rule is up for public comment until Nov. 3.

Here is the language in a proposed U.S. Forest Service rule that would restrict filming and photography in wilderness areas. Such activity would need to meet the following criteria:

Has a primary objective of dissemination of information about the use and enjoyment of wilderness or its ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.

Source: Statesman Journal

15 Responses to Feds Want To Restrict Filming In Wilderness Areas

  1. Have you ever considered creating an ebook or guest authoring on other blogs?
    I have a blog based on the same information you discuss and
    would really like to have you share some stories/information. I know my subscribers would
    value your work. If you are even remotely interested, feel free to shoot me an email.

  2. Rebecca Lee says:

    This Wilderness Act reminds me of when only the King of England and his cronies were allowed to hunt while the poor starved….

  3. Muad'dib says:

    We are starting to sound like the USSR right before it went down the crapper. Dont want the public to show how corporations are raping our land do we. I say war.

  4. Bella_Fantasia says:

    Who isn’t bothered by this? This wilderness is supposed to belong to the public. I don’t think advertisements should be filmed in parks. It’s not necessary. But people need to develop and nurture the love of nature.

    This does seem like Agenda 21 at work. Keeping people out, so anything else can be accomplished with the land, such as energy extraction, while we’re delegated to exist in compact cities. They don’t want people to see what they’re doing, plain as can be.

    And the people are already noticing the dying trees and lack of wildlife, large and small. Those of us here already are atune to this extinction. We are heart broken. Thanks to everyone here for your contributions. We must persist, take pictures, speak to others, expose the lies. They want to hide this but it is being uncovered, thanks to you.

  5. Dan shilling says:

    Anything that goes against the constitution is a direct threat to you and I. If I am ever confronted with such a theat or harassment I will take that as a direct threat (to my self or others) and defend myself in kind. Any change to the constitution that Obuma has done through executive order (to meet their agenda) is illegal.Give me freedom or death!

  6. SkywatcherGrandma says:

    Several years ago I watched an Alex Jones video about how the UN had taken control over many of our National Parks. I can’t remember the name of it now. He was going to several parks and was looking for a plaque in each one and I can’t remember now what it said, something about the UN and biosphere. I didn’t take the time to find the video but here is a link that has clips from that video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujTwYAUgPFM He found all the plaques but they were pretty much hidden from view. If anyone knows the video I’m thinking of please post it. Too much AL on the brain, I just can’t remember all of it. I do know I was furious watching it.
    My whole life I’ve preferred going to our National Parks on vacations, over a cruise or laying on a beach somewhere. I love the beauty of nature. Yosemite was always my favorite place. I don’t live in CA but I’ve been there 3 times. All the big parks, Lake Tahoe, Mt Shasta, the Ocean, Catalina. OMG it must be awful to live in Catalina now with all the spraying off shore. It makes me sick what they are doing to CA. I guess they don’t care about the Giant Sequoias or Redwoods. Ca is such a beautiful state, how they can keep this drought going is beyond me. They have to be insane to destroy all the beauty of nature! Sooo sad, so very very sad what is going on in this world. I feel so bad.

  7. Michel B says:

    It’s obvious they simply don’t want anyone noting, recording and spreading the word on the decline of the forests. The forests are but one corner of the entire biosphere that will be sacrificed in order for the psychopathic elite to wield control over the one animal they wish to dominate: Mankind. Everything is expendable, from the great whales to to smallest insects. They will destroy everything in order to try to control it. That is how insane they are.

    Can you see the psychopathic elite going on whale watching cruises or marvelling at the myriad lifeforms in a seaside rock pool? No, of course not. Instead they reside in plush, expensive rooms revelling in their power.

    To the empathic (we the people), the wilderness areas are close to our hearts because we see the inherent beauty in unspoiled nature. When the forests seriously start to die off, as they have in many areas of the world, possibly the general public will see this and start to ask questions.

    It is this process of the public waking up that they wish to curtail while they carry out their plans for reengineering the environment i.e. making it incompatible with most current lifeforms. All laws are being bent now to accommodate the elites method in gaining ‘full spectrum dominance’.

    All that is required to halt this is enough people waking up. Let’s get to work….

  8. David Jennings says:

    The States need to Annex all Federally held lands that are not directly used for national defense or administration. They took most of the Western States and Alaska by default. Obviously the elected officials and bureaucrats are Anti-American ~ Anti-Freedom…

  9. SkywatcherGrandma says:

    Maybe it’s because of the death and destruction from geoengineering, oil drilling and fracking. They don’t want us to see what they have done. More freedom being taken away from us, very sad. Another thing that really makes me upset is seing art work everywhere that has dark aresole skies, even chemtrails. Never beautiful clear blue sky anymore. Don’t they see these skies are NOT natural? Everything on TV, movies, commercials, everything with dark skies, white skies, you never see blue sky. If you do it is pale and full of clouds. I hate this crap!

  10. Ken says:

    Dane, I just came back from a drive between Dallas and Houston and, I didn’t have time to take pictures, but the amount of damage to the Trees is truly horrifying to me. In ALL areas, there were dead trees in the 20% range or more…in some areas, huge swaths of trees were MOSTLY DEAD. In addition, I can verify that there is little bug-kill on the windshield as they are affected too, and occasional large birds of prey like Hawks and Eagles can be seen looking for food because there are no other birds. I didn’t see any save a black bird. Most people hare NO IDEA the depth of damage we’re looking at. I’ve lived long enough to know this is an unreal event, truly a mass extinction event by all measurement from what I’ve seen myself and are hearing from others.

  11. Jocelyn Buckner says:

    This is already being enforced in Sedona. Last spring a group of artists in a Plein-Air art event, were kicked out of our local forest. The Red Rock Ranger district said they could not paint a picture of Sedona’s red rock wilderness and sell for it for a profit. A tour operator was fined $1000 and sentenced to 45 days in jail for taking his clients to the Airport Mesa vortex without the proper permits. It’s worse than you think.

  12. Leigh-Jane says:

    If the environment is to be ‘sustainably developed’ and yet people are to be banned from visiting the environment, what are they saying is the benefit to mankind of this ‘development’?? Black is the new White, and Up is the new Down. How much longer do they think they can get away with this arrogance? Comment to Marc – mankind is not the disease. the NWO is the disease. Mankind is the answer, and we all have it, in our hearts.

  13. Marc says:

    The arrogance AND ignorance of the mastermind of this proposed restriction is not quantifiable. I am slack-jawed in disbelief at the absurdity of this development. I long ago began to wonder if man is but a disease that has infected our MOTHER EARTH. Now I am convinced of it.

  14. Cori Gunnells says:

    This is chilling, and a confirmation of how very close we are to losing our rights and ability to express ourselves. This is a planned and deceptive arm of Agenda 21. Rosa Koire from Democrats Against U.N. Agenda 21 (do not let that title alarm you, she is as much a friend of the Libertarians, Tea Party…) explains this well. Here is a article from her website. The ‘Wilderness Act’ is Agenda 21. Please read up on it: http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/sustainable-development-article.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers