BrianO wrote:
How are they different than the non-photographers who are in the same place camping, hiking, wind surfing, etc.?
If we talk about careless people, there's no difference. They all want something for themselves without thinking too much about the damage they do.
But ... the more people visit a location, the more it will lose its character and the more damages will occur. Part of this negative development can also be photographers who mean well, but attract others through their work or by talking too much about their "secret" locations. One visitor doesn't do much harm, but if 100's follow then it's usually too late.
BrianO wrote:
How are they different than the non-photographers who are in the same place camping, hiking, wind surfing, etc.?
PhilPDX wrote:
If we talk about careless people, there's no difference.
Precisely, which takes me back to my comment that photographing something/someplace is not vandalizing it; spraying graffitti on it, trampling it, starting a wildfire on it, etc. is.
BrianO wrote:
when we leave, the object/place is fundamentally the same as when we arrived.
...and that's simply not true. Before you can take a picture you'll have to get to the location, and that's where and when most of the damage happens. Not by one photographer alone, but by the crowd that follows.
...and that's simply not true. Before you can take a picture you'll have to get to the location, and that's where and when most of the damage happens.
If you're going to equate my gentle footsetps on Mount Rainier, for example, to someone spray painting gang signs on the rocks up at Paradise, then we really have nothing more to talk about.
BrianO wrote:
If you're going to equate my gentle footsetps on Mount Rainier, for example, to someone spray painting gang signs on the rocks up at Paradise, then we really have nothing more to talk about.
No need to be miffed. You claimed that a photographer leaves a place virtually untouched, and I disagreed - that's all.
It's not only your "gentle footsteps" (how heavy are you, by the way? ) that do the damage, it's the footprints of all the others following you over the years that will finally ruin a place. How many examples do you need?
PhilPDX, have you ever done any back country camping? I have the same size shoes as Brian, I'm shorter and I weigh more, yet I can still "leave no trace".
Remedy is close at hand: reintroduce the predators indigenous to the area. Ya know, few coral snakes, scorpions, Whack a few visitors indiscriminately, visitation goes down, graffiti begins to disappear. Enough dead human bodies for the carrion to feed from - problem solved and guess what, with defunding, Ronnie the Ranger won't be around to "protect" anybody.
a) you are the first one to scout a location
b) you take your photos and post them on a forum like this
c) you reveal the location after people ask you
d) as a result, more people visit the same location to get their picture
e) these people also talk about the place
f) over time the number of visitors grows exponentially (worst case, of course)
g) the place is finally ruined for everyone
And you guys want to tell me that you don't have any impact? Your feet might not harm the place, but your actions after your visit certainly do. I could give you tons of examples where pristine locations were destroyed the way I just described.
PhilPDX wrote:
...And you guys want to tell me that you don't have any impact? Your feet might not harm the place, but your actions after the visit certainly do.
You are obviously trolling now. Anyone visiting anyplace has some impact; that's not what I was commenting on, and I think you know it.
What I was commenting on was this:
kinconorb wrote: One could argue we the photographers are the true vandals.
BrianO wrote:
...Taking a photo of something is NOT vandalizing it; when we leave, the object/place is fundamentally the same as when we arrived. The same is not true of someone spraying paint all over the place, carving their names into trees, etc.
Now, unless you can give me a concrete example of how my actions have harmed someplace, I think it's time to end this thread.
PhilPDX wrote:
And you guys want to tell me that you don't have any impact? Your feet might not harm the place, but your actions after your visit certainly do. I could give you tons of examples where pristine locations were destroyed the way I just described.
I believe each individual is responsible for their own actions. I'm responsible for my actions, not for their actions.
That evil Ansel Adams, who knew that when he thought he was bringing attention and hope to the national parks he was really destroying them? Perhaps we should lock them away so that only an elite few can ever visit them on their hover boards?
I believe it is the mandate of the NPS to preserve and protect the natural resources while enabling the public the ability to view and enjoy them. Preservation is paramount and if the public use prevents this then the park should limit accessibility. Many historic Egyptian site have similar status. It is unfortunate but hardly unexpected.
Beni wrote:
That evil Ansel Adams, who knew that when he thought he was bringing attention and hope to the national parks he was really destroying them?
Just visit Yosemite during peak season, and then we'll talk again. :)
PhilPDX wrote:
Well, is that really something new? Once "secret" travel locations become well known and vastly popular over a short period of time and get swamped with people - including vandals. I've seen far too many beautiful places going down the drain because so-called travellers, tourists and photographers were talking too much (I'm "guilty" here, too, by the way). Pacific City in Oregon is just one example, Cape Tribulation in Australia another.
What once were only the pesky scouts of the tourist industry, are now social media and forums and boards on the web. Underfunding of national parks and a lack of protection, and people who find it cool to destroy landmarks just add to the general problem.
Wow, Pacific City, what has become of that desolate outpost? I used to go there a lot in the 1980s, was just some small houses on the beach that had been burried by sand and a little hole in the wall bar that served stiff Long Island iced teas. Always cold and raining except for about three months out of the year, not the kind of place anyone wanted to spend much time in.
) that do the damage, it's the footprints of all the others following you over the years that will finally ruin a place. How many examples do you need?
Whack a few visitors indiscriminately, visitation goes down, graffiti begins to disappear. Enough dead human bodies for the carrion to feed from - problem solved 
