Photographer policing?

[brewercm]

This guy.

[ptrd]

hrm I see what you did there!



Ha I knew it! I saw it but I guess it was fun while it lasted.

[Jeff_Green]

Originally Posted by SCone

Per the Arches National Park website...

Restrictions and Conditions
(3) mechanical or pyrotechnic special effects

There seems to be a process for obtaining a permit for these actions, but they must be reviewed prior to issue of the permit

Thanks, Steve! I looked around and couldn't find it. Some comments from the other thread were general statement. It's good to know the specific laws.

[ronocnikral]

Originally Posted by Jeff_Green

Thanks, Steve! I looked around and couldn't find it. Some comments from the other thread were general statement. It's good to know the specific laws.

Also, it is most likely buried deep in the legal code, but every national park I have been to in southern utah (and a lot of BLM land in southern Utah) do allow fires, but they are very specific to where you can have them. For instance, only in fire rings which already exist (which they have built). When I camped east of Isky last september, the BLM (which tends to have looser "rules" than NPS) was specific of where you can camp and where fires were to be. Also, gathering of firewood is a no-no in a lot of southern utah public land.

Come to think of it, even the boundary waters in northern minnesota wants you sticking to already existing fire rings.

[Nikonfan]

I haven't been in a National Park since I was a kid. Are cigarettes allowed? I don't smoke anymore but I'm curious since they also have fire.

[mdparthum]

It was a good run.

[ndsimm]

[Jeff_Green]

It always makes me giggle when a thread slows down there are some who have to post "dead horse" comments that end up keeping the thread at the top of the forum!

[Abel]

Originally Posted by mdparthum

It was a good run.

love that!

[rab3rd]

Yeah, giggles. Kind of like starting a new thread about a dead locked thread to get the banter going again. Funny stuff... :-)

[crazeazn]

*ahem* *farts*

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by crazeazn

*ahem* *farts*

Did you eat stinky tofu?

[rab3rd]

*passes out*

[Jeff_Green]

Originally Posted by rab3rd

Yeah, giggles. Kind of like starting a new thread about a dead locked thread to get the banter going again. Funny stuff... :-)

It wasn't about a locked thread but about attitudes. A desire to not only make your point but to do so constantly and without regard for tact (as has been explicitly said in this thread).

THIS thread is about "think before you post" to get a friendlier forum :)

[rab3rd]

Originally Posted by Jeff_Green

Just curious why it is that there is such a desire to police those in our community to the point of driving them away?

We are all a part of a special community that has been around for YEARS. Some of us have been a part of the forum in some way or another for a LONG time. It seems that we have some (and it varies based on the topic) who not only want to tell people why they shouldn't do something, but then continue to tell them and then others will jump in to tell them the same thing.

Many times, the issue has nothing to do with the photograph, the photographer, or photography, but the policer's soap box. Recent instance was the landscape thread (now closed) on lighting steel wool in a state park. It wasn't enough to say "Be careful, they can fine you for that". It had to get turned into an insult to the Original Poster's intelligence. Whether it is that, railroad tracks, private property, whatever, I can't understand it.

If you feel the need to correct someones absolutely horrible actions of standing too close to railroad tracks or whatever, make your remarks in a kind, friendly manner and DROP IT. I don't care to see links about a burn ban from 2008 followed by numerous links concerning one instance. Don't drive our fellow photographers from a forum that has proven to be a valuable asset to many because you can't step off your soap box.
{stepping off my soap box}

Not pickin, just sayin....