I was told to leave Crystal Cove State Park by a ranger.

[Glenn Price]

I was going to ignore this but I think it is important enough to post as it may affect other photographers in California.

I was photographing birds at crystal cove last week when a park ranger pulled up next to me.
She said that my camera equipment looked expensive. I agreed with her. She asked wether I was a professional photographer, which I am not. I told the photos were for my personal use, and that I posted them on my website. She took my driver's lic. info, and told me to pack my gear up and leave the park.
She also stated that she would not give me a citation for photographing without a permit this time.
She also told me that the California State Parks had been having a problem with photographers posting images taken in the parks on forums and entering them in competitions without the State parks express permission.
I have been unable to find any information on the California State Parks website expressly forbidding the posting of digital media. The only information on filming/photographing permits was for commercial usage.

This policy of denying access to amateur photographers in California State Parks seems particular unhealthy especially in light of the possible closures by the governor.

This is why I am not posting photos at this time.

[Jason Vaclavek]

You might try the park head-quarters or a rangers station and explain to them how your not a professional doing this for commercial purposes and see what they say about it?

[Glenn Price]

She understood that I was not a professional photographer. She is a badged-park ranger and should be aware of policy.
They wish to prevent amateur photographers from posting photos from California State Parks on forums like this one, and entering competitions.

[Jim Poor]

I think it is dangerous to assume what "they" want to do. It may simply be a case of an over zealous ranger enforcing what she thinks the policy is. Whether or not she has an excuse for being misinformed is neither here nor there. I'd definitely take it up her chain and to park HQ for clarification.

[Anita Rakestraw]

Why on earth would this be a problem with the park officials?? Am I being really dense?

[Paul Pagano]

This is quite surprising. I've never heard of photography being prohibited on public lands before.

[Alfred Forns]

Strange policy? Seems like one of the things to do at a state park is to photograph?

Perhaps there is something about professionals usage and the ranger made the wrong decision Hope it can be cleared out !!!!

[Robert O'Toole]

This policy of denying access to amateur photographers in California State Parks seems particular unhealthy especially in light of the possible closures by the governor.

This is why I am not posting photos at this time.

Sorry to hear this Glenn.
I am a Los Angeles county Native and have grown up and spent most of my adult life in the South Bay only moving to Florida last year. I have had this same experience countless times in Los Angeles and Orange County. In some cases I was hassled by the same "Photographer police" person day after day. I have been traveling all over the world since my teenage years and have never been treated as badly as I have at home. This was actually one (of many) for moving out of California.

For the record I have never had any problems with any staff or agencies while photographing in Florida. Actually when I Photograph overseas park staff will normally ask how everything is going for me and if they can possibly be of any assistance. In fact this was the case on a recent trip to Japan, park staff would ask me how everything was going each day and provide directions, maps, advice and weather forecast printouts with a big smile and a big thank you.

Robert

[Grady Weed]

Personally I have never been asked to pack up and leave a state park or other public land by a Ranger. Maybe she had a personality conflict with you. Not to assume here you provoked her. Some people might just be having a bad day and you came along. If after polite dialog she was not more reasonable, then packing up and leaving was the right thing to do rather than be arrested or cause a scene. Jim's suggestion is a good one. Go up her chain of command rather go a round it. sounds like she is enforcing her policy not the states. It is the right of all to take photos of birds. Even the government can't stop you from doing that. You might need a permit, but you can take personal photos. I never tell others I am a pro. Just taking photos for my personal use is what I tell someone. Less hassle. Of course if I want to use it commercially, thats different.

[Blake Shadle]

Get your concealed weapons license and keep a 9mm on you and......... wait, nevermind.

So a photo taken outside of the parks boundary could be used commercially without a problem? What's the difference?? Sounds greedy to me... not the park ranger, the state. The park ranger was most likely just doing their job. I just don't like that tossing photographers is one of their job requirements.

[Michael Pancier]

Florida State Parks requires a permit if you are filming for commercial but for non commercial purposes you can shoot all you want.

I've never been hassled here by the park service. Interestingly, the Florida State Park services encourages you to submit your photos for their website and for competition.

[Harry Behret]

She was wrong. This is from the California State Parks web site "The use of photographic equipment in units of the State Park System will be subject to appropriate rules and regulations. Photography for non-commercial personal purposes is to be encouraged as a means of enhancing visitor enjoyment of units in the State Park System and extending the benefits and influences of the recreational experience"

Taking pictures, putting them on your web site, and posting them here is not defined as commerical. Here's the PDF file with all their rules (http://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/782/files/film.pdf) on filming and photography.

I have lost count of the times employees have told me misinformation concerning photography at various sites.

[Robert O'Toole]

Personally I have never been asked to pack up and leave a state park or other public land by a Ranger. Maybe she had a personality conflict with you.

Dont think Glenn's problem was personal Grady. I have been told the same thing by Rangers and even park personal in California more than a dozen times so its old news to me. This started happening abruptly a couple of years ago.

Robert

[john crookes]

This is the same problem that some rangers in the national parks have .

The rule as far as I can tell lets anyone photograph from an area that is accesable to the general public whether the photographer is a pro or not has nothing to do with that.

The permit process comes into play when you are going to ask to go beyond the public access areas or you are filming with equipment that may hinder the general publics use of an area.

IE a film crew for a movie would take up a lot of area to film a segment so they would need a permit. A swimsuit photographer would need to set up lights and such and also would need a permit.

As long as you are staying on the public paths and are not hindering the general public you have as much right to be there as the next person and if the ranger disagrees please get their name and badge number and report the incident to the proper athorities

[Glenn Price]

I don't think it was personal, as I was not argumentative in any way. I was aware of national park policy, but not State so I wanted to learn more. I was certainly in an area that was open to the public. I know that they have been asking photographers for some time now wether they are shooting for commercial purposes.

A year ago most rangers that I came in contact with seemed really glad that I was enjoying the park in this way. I have even had one come and give me a current bird list for the park I was in.

One thing that is somewhat ironic is that last year I was a monitor for the least tern breeding project on Huntington State Beach. They did not seem to have a problem using some of the photos I took their for promotional purposes!

[Glenn Price]

I saw those last night. Do they really expect a professional/amateur nature photographers to be able to have liablility insurance in the amounts that a film studio has!

[Maxis Gamez]

Sux for them because they are loosing the business. In the mean time there is a oil spill by a tanker in Alaska. Incredible.

[Brian Kersey]

Wow. That is one of the most ridiculous things that I have ever heard. I'm tired of being hassled for harmless things like taking photos. Our tax dollars fund the parks, so we shouldn't even have to buy permits to use the photos commercially. I have seen this happen before and it really is BS. The govt. is much too greedy. Instead of "shaking" us down for more money in those cheap and annoying ways, they should look to other ways to produce revenue. I personally think any permit to photograph or explore the wild is unnecessary and stupid. But that's my 2 cents and I won't ramble any more :)

[Don Lacy]

I would carry a copy of the rules and regulation with me next time and politely stand my ground more then likely they will back down once they know they are dealing with a person who is aware of there rights. The last time I visited a newly open state park here in Florida the ranger was so proud of the place she drove me around on her cart to show it off.

[john crookes]

I have emailed the park in question to protest this action and i would hope anyone else here would do the same.

there is a contact link at their web site which is

www.crystalcovestatepark.com (http://www.crystalcovestatepark.com)

there is power in our questions and protests

John

[Bob Ferry]

I too do not understand why one would need a permit to photograph birds. Photographs if nothing else promote their product. Why should they care what the use of the picture is for? Ultimately its free publicity for them. BTW it appears she "profiled" you. Just because you can afford "expensive" photo gear you MUST be a pro?. Ridiculous IMO

[c.w. moynihan]

keeping a copy of the Park photo rules with you and kindly refreshing the rangers memory in a helpful and considerate (even if your pissed..i would be) way should remedy the problem.

[Ken Kovak]

Has anyone found any rules / regulations regarding photography in CA state parks? I took a quick look but didn't find anything. My wife and I will be vacationing in cental CA in early May and plan on doing alot of photography so if there are some rules that are relevant I'd like to know ahead of time.

Thanks
Ken

[Robert O'Toole]

keeping a copy of the Park photo rules with you and kindly refreshing the rangers memory in a helpful and considerate (even if your pissed..i would be) way should remedy the problem.

This is a good way to handle a lot of issues (being friendly and nice but at the same time firm) that a photographer can face, issues at the airport, dealing with camera manufacturers, etc.
The problem is that the advice above, good as it is, wont stop any subsequent hassles later in the day, the next day, at other parks around CA. I have been hassled by the same staff day after day to the point I just will not go back. The photographic opps were not worth the headaches.


Robert

[Ric Grupe]

Write a letter to Arnold and let him know you're not a "girly man"! :D

Just plain rediculous...and sad.

[Glenn Price]

I just want everyone to know that I have been in touch with the Crystal Cove Superintendent, and this issue has been resolved amicably!

Thanks everyone for your support!

Here is a link to some of my photos taken at Crystal Cove!
http://raptorcaptor.smugmug.com/gallery/2473574_QWPGc

[JH Tugs]

That's great news!

For the sake of tying up a few loose ends, were you able to establish whether the ranger was correct to ask you to leave?

[Glenn Price]

That's great news!

For the sake of tying up a few loose ends, were you able to establish whether the ranger was correct to ask you to leave?

To be honest I am not sure! But I think this incident has taught me that the best approach is to let them know what your intentions are beforehand.

[JH Tugs]

*grin* Fair enough :-) Glad it got sorted out.

[BillPelzmann]

I have emailed the park in question to protest this action and i would hope anyone else here would do the same.

there is a contact link at their web site which is

www.crystalcovestatepark.com (http://www.crystalcovestatepark.com)

there is power in our questions and protests

John

John, thanks. I've sent an email requesting their rules on photography in the park.
Their website has a page on park rules, but not a single mention of ANY photography restrictions.

I don't have a problem with the current national park photography rules. They really are intended to prevent abuse by commercial operations and I feel the rangers should have this control.

What gets my blood-pressure up are these "local" interpretations by bureaucrats who obviously can't read. I'm assuming the California park rules are probably no different than the national park regulations - but I want to confirm - just in case California has taken it one step further.:eek:

Thanks for pointing this out, Glenn. It is VERY disconcerting to hear that you are still not clear if the ranger interpreted the rules correctly ! You certainly have delt with the problem gracefully.

California can kiss my vacation dollars goodbye if they want to play these games.

[Glenn Price]

John, thanks. I've sent an email requesting their rules on photography in the park.
Their website has a page on park rules, but not a single mention of ANY photography restrictions.

I don't have a problem with the current national park photography rules. They really are intended to prevent abuse by commercial operations and I feel the rangers should have this control.

What gets my blood-pressure up are these "local" interpretations by bureaucrats who obviously can't read. I'm assuming the California park rules are probably no different than the national park regulations - but I want to confirm - just in case California has taken it one step further.:eek:

Thanks for pointing this out, Glenn. It is VERY disconcerting to hear that you are still not clear if the ranger interpreted the rules correctly ! You certainly have delt with the problem gracefully.

California can kiss my vacation dollars goodbye if they want to play these games.

Thanks Bill,

I think the big problem facing enforcement of these kind of regulations is that there is no real way for the ranger to know what the intended usage of the photos are. That seemed to be the main issue.

The main clarification that I wanted was wether I am able to share my photos in forums, and on my personal site. And that is not a problem.

I think that the internet poses a lot of challenges, and will probably be a headache for both parks, and photographers until some realistic policy is clearly defined.

[BillPelzmann]

Glenn,

How anyone uses their photos is NOT an issue in the national park regulations, nor should it be for the state parks.
Using a tripod or "professional" gear does NOT require a national park permit. A permit is required only if you bring models, props, go to areas off limits to the normal public, obstruct public access, conduct photo workshops, etc.

California may differ, so that is what I would like to determine. Sounds like some park administrators may be trying to use this as a revenue generator after their budgets have been cut.

If California parks truly have such restrictive regulations on the books, the photographic community needs some serious lobbying efforts to get them changed. Fads from CA have a way of spreading across the country, and this would be a travesty!

Bill

[Glenn Price]

Glenn,

How anyone uses their photos is NOT an issue in the national park regulations,

Bill

I made the assumption that the regulations would be similar, and I was wrong.

Somehow spending recreational money on dirt bikes, and sea-doo's is acceptable, but spending money on camera gear is seen as "professional". It might simply be a matter of changing this perception!

[BillPelzmann]

Glenn, I contacted the state park and was directed to their film guidelines website:
http://www.parks.ca.gov/default.asp?page_id=24777

They have a 43 page pdf file. Your situation is described on page 36. Posting a picture on a website forum or entering a photo contest is NOT defined as commercial use. You are correct, this is obviously their "interpretation".

Page 35, section #4 Commercial Still Photography, does go beyond what I have seen in the national park regulations:

"This category covers photography for sale or profit aside from filming for motion pictures or television. Such photography may be permitted after appropriate application and required insurance. Commercial still photography permits are handled in the same manner as commercial motion picture, video and television photography."
- i.e. you need a permit and insurance if you plan to sell a landscape or wildlife print !

It is a great leap from these requlations to:..." the California State Parks had been having a problem with photographers posting images taken in the parks on forums and entering them in competitions without the State parks express permission." Where does the law require their permission for this activity ???

[Glenn Price]

Glenn, I contacted the state park and was directed to their film guidelines website:
http://www.parks.ca.gov/default.asp?page_id=24777

They have a 43 page pdf file. Your situation is described on page 36. Posting a picture on a website forum or entering a photo contest is NOT defined as commercial use. You are correct, this is obviously their "interpretation".

Page 35, section #4 Commercial Still Photography, does go beyond what I have seen in the national park regulations:

"This category covers photography for sale or profit aside from filming for motion pictures or television. Such photography may be permitted after appropriate application and required insurance. Commercial still photography permits are handled in the same manner as commercial motion picture, video and television photography."
- i.e. you need a permit and insurance if you plan to sell a landscape or wildlife print !

It is a great leap from these requlations to:..." the California State Parks had been having a problem with photographers posting images taken in the parks on forums and entering them in competitions without the State parks express permission." Where does the law require their permission for this activity ???


I think that initial intpretation came from the park ranger, and was not correct.
This is the clarification that I got concerning forums from the Park Superintendent:

"The film permit threshold for us is sale or offering of sale of any images taken on state park
property. So, as long as that is not occurring, posting and sharing your
pictures with other enthusiasts is perfectly fine."

[BillPelzmann]

So, will the superintendent educate his park rangers, or will they continue to harass and run off amateur photographers?

His interpretation is essentially uninforceable. Will they now have rangers policing the internet and art fairs to find "illegal" images for sale and taken without a permit ??? I see they will need a budget supplement to hire the extra staff.

[Glenn Price]

So, will the superintendent educate his park rangers, or will they continue to harass and run off amateur photographers?

His interpretation is essentially uninforceable. Will they now have rangers policing the internet and art fairs to find "illegal" images for sale and taken without a permit ??? I see they will need a budget supplement to hire the extra staff.

I don't know how this will affect future photographers! I hope that if we can reinforce a positive attitude towards photographers we will have less problems.

On a personal note I have been offered a permit waiver to show to rangers on the park.

[George DeCamp]

I am always dumbfounded when I read stuff like this. If I have a Les Paul guitar am I a professional guitar player? If I ride a Harley am I a professional biker? If I drive a Porsche am I a NASCAR driver? So why am I a pro photographer if I have a nice camera? Rangers need to be educated as well.

[James Salywoda]

As you know I'm glad you posted this Glenn people should be aware of this matter. Its a real shame that you can't take pictures with any comfort when the Rangers come asking what your taking pictures of. A Total Joke!!!!I'm glad that you have solved this issue with Crystal Cove. I'm wondering if I will eventually need a permit.:(

Jim

[Glenn Price]

I am always dumbfounded when I read stuff like this. If I have a Les Paul guitar am I a professional guitar player? If I ride a Harley am I a professional biker? If I drive a Porsche am I a NASCAR driver? So why am I a pro photographer if I have a nice camera? Rangers need to be educated as well.

That was pretty much how I felt!

[Glenn Price]

As you know I'm glad you posted this Glenn people should be aware of this matter. Its a real shame that you can't take pictures with any comfort when the Rangers come asking what your taking pictures of. A Total Joke!!!!I'm glad that you have solved this issue with Crystal Cove. I'm wondering if I will eventually need a permit.:(

Jim

We shouldn't have to but I would recommend stopping by the office, and just let them know who you are and what you do!

[Gib Robinson]

Glenn,

If that happens again, consider taking a badge number and pursuing the issue. It would be worth finding out whether "the policy" was being defined and enforced by one zealous ranger or whether there is a broader mandate.

[LeeOtsubo]

I've been following this with interest, mainly because I live relatively nearby, in north San Diego County. How about a "Crystal Cove Photo Day"? We can organize a large group of SoCal photographers to converge on Crystal Cove on a specific date around a specific time bearing the biggest, most "professional" gear we can muster and make photos around the ranger station. I'd be happy to help organize such an event.

[Blake Shadle]

I am always dumbfounded when I read stuff like this. If I have a Les Paul guitar am I a professional guitar player? If I ride a Harley am I a professional biker? If I drive a Porsche am I a NASCAR driver? So why am I a pro photographer if I have a nice camera? Rangers need to be educated as well.

Yes to all of those questions, George :D

[Jeff Wear]

As you know I'm glad you posted this Glenn people should be aware of this matter. Its a real shame that you can't take pictures with any comfort when the Rangers come asking what your taking pictures of. A Total Joke!!!!I'm glad that you have solved this issue with Crystal Cove. I'm wondering if I will eventually need a permit.:(

Jim
you know you will ---at bolsa it took many complaints to have them do something about the water walker .So when Glenn told about this I was not suprised , the rangers are a joke! If it had been me there then it may have been ME but not Glenn easy going and polite so it was not Glenn [to those that looked in that directon] I would have ask for the ticket and said see you in court .Go by the airport and take a picture if you really want to take crap .If we talk about it enough here then I am sure the Gov. will add a new picture taking tax and we will have to report shutter counts every year :eek: so please sssshhhhhhhhh Glenn really a great idea to post this thanks for the call you did handle it well

[Arthur Morris]

I just want everyone to know that I have been in touch with the Crystal Cove Superintendent, and this issue has been resolved amicably! Thanks everyone for your support! Here is a link to some of my photos taken at Crystal Cove!
http://raptorcaptor.smugmug.com/gallery/2473574_QWPGc

Glenn, Please do let us know what the settlement was. Years ago I made the mistake of showing a calendar of mine to the lady at the Pay Booth at Cuyamaca State Park outside of San Diego. Ben Miller and I found a great water drip right near the entrance; we had species coming in that I had never even seen before. Unbeknownst to me, the nice lady had called two state troopers who, with their hands on their guns, demanded that I leave the park because I was a professional. (Remember the calendar???)

I did a bit of work on line and found that any commercial photography (remember that I am a full time professional) requires a permit. One of the first questions on the application was "How many catering trucks will there be?" I e-mailed requesting more information but my e-mail was never answered.

The same thing happened to me at Fort Tilden, Gateway National Park right after the passage of a federal law that stated that anyone can photograph (with or without a tripod and "professional equipment) anywhere on federal property where the general public is allowed.

My understanding is that professional photographers are not allowed to create images in Florida State Parks. I have never been hassled but do know of a few folks who were.

It would seem that the only way to get a straight answer to any of the above would be to get arrested and find out what the law actually is....

Someone, at least in CA, needs to go higher than the guy who runs CCSP if anything truly good is to come out of this... And same in other locations where photographers rights are being abused.

later and love, artie

[Ed Cordes]

So, there really is a regulation (Law) that says you can't sell images you make on state park land? This is ridiculous! It is also poorly thought out. I can understand if "catering trucks", large props, film crews, huge lighting systems and other stuff are needed then a permit should be required. However a photographer, or even several together, interacting with the park in the same manner as "normal" tourists do not put any additional stress on the system.

What does it matter if an image captured is put up for sale? If I am an armature with pro equipment I am allowed to photograph without a permit, but if my website offers images for sale I am not? I fail to see the difference - other than the state wants a piece of the action! It is another example of government run amok. The government officials forget that they work for the public (and pro photographers are part of the public). The public owns the state parks as well as the national parks. We, in essence, have hired the rangers and administrators to manage the lands in a way that preserves their special qualities, but still allows us to access their beauty and character. So, as long as we are not doing anything destructive, or potentially destructive, or placing anyone or anything in jeopardy there should be no restrictions and no permits required to use "OUR" land in any manner that we wish - including capturing images for sale.

[Anita Rakestraw]

I agree, Ed; this whole thing totally floors me; I always thought that scenery, for sure destination parks, belonged to all of us with the only major restrictions having to do with potential harm to the land/flora and fauna/humans. I would think that entrance and camping permits would be enough. What difference does it make if one sells images one has photographed there? If anything, those images are potent advertisements that make people want to visit those places! Seems absolutely crazy to me!

[George DeCamp]

Yes to all of those questions, George :D

I'm gonna moider ya! :D

[Glenn Price]

Glenn, Please do let us know what the settlement was. Years ago I made the mistake of showing a calendar of mine to the lady at the Pay Booth at Cuyamaca State Park outside of San Diego. Ben Miller and I found a great water drip right near the entrance; we had species coming in that I had never even seen before. Unbeknownst to me, the nice lady had called two state troopers who, with their hands on their guns, demanded that I leave the park because I was a professional. (Remember the calendar???)

I did a bit of work on line and found that any commercial photography (remember that I am a full time professional) requires a permit. One of the first questions on the application was "How many catering trucks will there be?" I e-mailed requesting more information but my e-mail was never answered.

The same thing happened to me at Fort Tilden, Gateway National Park right after the passage of a federal law that stated that anyone can photograph (with or without a tripod and "professional equipment) anywhere on federal property where the general public is allowed.

My understanding is that professional photographers are not allowed to create images in Florida State Parks. I have never been hassled but do know of a few folks who were.

It would seem that the only way to get a straight answer to any of the above would be to get arrested and find out what the law actually is....

Someone, at least in CA, needs to go higher than the guy who runs CCSP if anything truly good is to come out of this... And same in other locations where photographers rights are being abused.

later and love, artie

After a couple of emails I offered to let Crystal Cove State Park use some of my photos from the park for non-commercial use, and the superintendent offered me a permit waiver.

[Jared Lloyd]

Im just currious as to why she kicked you out instead of simply issuing you a permit on the spot? With the war at hand, many state and federal areas are finding themselves in desperate need for money to keep these areas open. This I understand. Is the permit situation in California park by park, or can you buy an annual photographers pass like a national parks pass? Theres also talk about requiring people to purchase passes to enter and use national forests as well - does anyone know anything about this?

[William Malacarne]

I Theres also talk about requiring people to purchase passes to enter and use national forests as well - does anyone know anything about this?

Adventure Pass....National Forest Southern Calif. Here is the link as it is much easier than trying to write it all. I off hand do not know if this is also at other places.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/sanbernardino/ap/pass-options.shtml

Bill M

[Amy DeStefanis]

The question Art mentions that he found on the application for a permit makes it sound like it's professional EVENT photographers that the state is trying to ensure have gotten permits.... It sounds as if they are trying to keep large events (movie crews? large photo shoots for magazines with models/makeup/hair, etc? even weddings?) under control.... But somewhere along the lines, the purpose for the controls has run amok.

Who wants to volunteer to get arrested and find out? :D

[BillPelzmann]

The question Art mentions that he found on the application for a permit makes it sound like it's professional EVENT photographers that the state is trying to ensure have gotten permits.... It sounds as if they are trying to keep large events (movie crews? large photo shoots for magazines with models/makeup/hair, etc? even weddings?) under control.... But somewhere along the lines, the purpose for the controls has run amok. ..... :D

I agree, Amy. This is a classic example of how a well intentioned regulation gets twisted, and why such regulations need to be clearly written to avoid such an outcome. Where are those lawyers when you need them...:D

[Jason Hahn]

Not to hijack your thread, but last year I called the powers that be in Tallahassee to find out what the requirements were for professional photographers in Florida State Parks. According to the folks I talked to at that time, there were no limits on photographing in Florida Parks or on running photography workshops for profit. Then this past fall in Falling Waters State Park, we were told that pro photography was not allowed. I told them that I was trold by Tallahassee that it was okay, but they didn't care. Not sure what the right answer is, but I would be curious to know what other Florida photogs have run into.

Jason

[Jared Lloyd]

professional photography was not allowed period?!?!?

[Christopher Hill]

Perhaps we should look at this a bit differently.

Parks don't belong to us as individuals, they belong to a population as a whole. As owners of a resource, the population can reasonably expect individual users of that resource who wish to make a profit from it to pay for its usage. To manage that resource, the population's representatives (the appropriate government) regulate its commercial use through permits and fees that cover expenses above and beyond the normal cost of upkeep (the normal upkeep is, of course, payed for by the owners through their taxes and through the entry fees - if any - charged all users).

So it's really not an issue of "Are you a professional photographer?" or "Is that professional equipment?" but rather "Will you be using these images you are taking to make a profit?"

If we can't seem to see this clearly, is it so hard to understand that a park ranger wouldn't? If there is a problem where people who use these parks for profit claim they are just doing it for personal pleasure to avoid the hassle of a permit or the cost of a license, is it really surprising that rangers employ a form of profiling based on the cost of the equipment being used to weigh the veracity of such claims?

That said, my personal feeling is that taking pictures is a far cry from other private uses of public resources like cutting down trees, grazing cattle, mining for ore, or drilling for oil. No damage is done by pressing a shutter button (I'm not addressing the act of getting to the place where the picture was taken, however). The object photographed isn't physically degraded from such usage and the idea of recovering the cost of usage purely from the photo is misplaced. I think the idea that someone who made a few dollars (or even many dollars) from an image he took should pay a usage fee is more about jealousy of a sort than it is about real economics. I have no desire to have to apply for a permit and possibly pay a fee to take pictures for pleasure just because at some date in the future I may decide to enter one of my photos in a contest with prizes, or even sell a copy of it to someone. Like most of you, I think it's entirely wrong-headed - any fees or permits should be firmly based on unusual usage, inconvenience, or cost above that normally incurred by a typical user of the park.

[David Kennedy]

It would seem that the only way to get a straight answer to any of the above would be to get arrested and find out what the law actually is....

Hmm....maybe if we create a legal defense fund first........

I do recall in 2006 when new rules were put in place by the NPS, but clearly those were for federal lands, not state and local lands. The NPPA had a brief piece here (http://www.nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2006/04/fees.html), and Michael Reichmann's interpretation (scroll down for May 2006 updates (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/new/new-2006.shtml)) was that:

Photographers doing any commercial still, film or video work in National Parks in the US should be aware of new rules which take effect in two weeks time. They mean that a permit will be required and fees will be charged. Fine Art and other non-commercial photographers should not be affected, but I've had enough run-ins with NP staff and rangers in the past to know that the sight of a tripod and pro level gear is going to elicit some heated debates in the days ahead. And, if you've ever tried to argue with a state trooper over a speeding ticket, you've already had a dress rehearsal for how those conversations are going to go.