for what's it worth IMHO you did the right thing ! the rope was put there to keep people out no mater who they might think they are they are not any better than anyone else
Two weeks ago I was hiking up to Delicate Arch because my sisters both came to visit. So we're hiking back down and this couple is going up but with their dogs, a Siberian husky and a mixed breed. Two dogs. Although dogs are clearly not allowed on the Arches trails, especially the crown jewel of the park, there are signs everywhere and in the brochures... A felony? Walking with dogs, or crossing a fence line, or on cryptobiotic soil a felony? I doubt it.
I finally find a ranger, which took forever.. I tell him these people are up there right now and they should be ticketed. He says "There's only three of us here today, what can we do?"
So, you get these endless emails about donating to the Park Service, and where does the money go I wonder? Three rangers? In a crown jewel park? It's getting pissed away... The sad part is that the NPS office is right next door to my office, the parking lot is full of vehicles, so what are they doing, who are all these people...?
And you wonder why False Kiva is now closed...
I'd guarantee that people no longer have that same sense of ecology that they did in the past. Now it's the "Me." ...Show more →
The problem is that only something like 14 National Parks in the US have fee stations. So the money brought in from these parks that are the busiest are spread among all the parks (and maybe National Monuments as well). Then funding to NPS was cut last year.
So until we get another Roosevelt in office, I am afraid it will be this way, and also as you well know, Zion and Arches are looking at a Permit system to just enter the park.
I enjoy bird photography which has more ethics than you could imagine. The problem for bird photographers is the ethics police do not understand "a cropped image taken using a 800mm lens". The subject appears close so let's call everyone out.
As a general rule of thumb/my approach: Treat it as if the space were mine, and how would I feel having a handful of people shooting into my space? Yes, I still get angry watching others do as they please, but "I" will not be called out.
I don't advocate "policing" ethics in photography. You never know how crazy a person can be.
As for myself, my ignorance may have led me to photograph scenes unethically, but I don't intentionally break laws, nor would I intentionally damage visible life, (saplings, brush, wild grasses, etc...). I say visible, because I've walked off trail through the Joshua Tree desert and other places that seem to only be dirt and rocks.
GregWCIL wrote:
Well, Thrice, it appears he was in the wrong. Having said that, I find it interesting that some people like you feel the need to call him out on it in a public forum. Yet, you say you have been to Iceland many times. Just wondering what your carbon footprint is for all that travel from Australia. Do you pretend your activities have no negative effects on the planet? My grandmother had an expression for that: "The pot calling the kettle black."
You're way off base on so many points, Greg. Thrice didn't name the perp. Of course the misdeeds of the errant photographer need to be called out in a public forum. That's the whole point. It's a lesson for both the perp and for other photographers who think they're entitled to do whatever harm they want to do to nature, then top it off with contrived excuses. If you have been paying attention, Greg, some photographers are among the worst offenders in harming nature for selfish purposes and to the detriment of the rest of us photographers. The offenders need called out for their harmful actions, whether it's setting damaging fires to get dramatic lighting or deliberately tromping on fragile vegetation. With more posts like Thrice's, abusive photographers are on notice that their destructive actions are not ok and conscientious photographers are not going to give them a pass.
In contrast, Greg, your post enables destructive behavior of photographers.
Greg, your attempt to shame Thrice is senseless and really offensive. What did your grandma say? The footprints made by the errant photographer's boots are far more concentrated and damaging to Iceland's plants than Thrice's dispersed "carbon footprint" of buying a seat on airplane. It's a matter of simple cause-and-effect.
01Ryan10 wrote:
I don't advocate "policing" ethics in photography. You never know how crazy a person can be.
As for myself, my ignorance may have led me to photograph scenes unethically, but I don't intentionally break laws, nor would I intentionally damage visible life, (saplings, brush, wild grasses, etc...). I say visible, because I've walked off trail through the Joshua Tree desert and other places that seem to only be dirt and rocks.
Ryan, those "places that seem to only be dirt and rocks" have a lot of life, both plants and animals. Just because it's not a tropical rainforest doesn't mean nothing is growing there. Look more closely. If you are vision impaired, wait for the monsoons or the winter/spring rains to see the show of new leaves and flowers. Go out at night to see the arthropods out and about--just like the ones that you crushed in their burrows in the daytime. All play key roles in the desert ecosystem. You're informed now. Your "ignorance" (your term, not mine) is no longer an excuse. Please stick to the trails.
jdc562 wrote:
Ryan, those "places that seem to only be dirt and rocks" have a lot of life, both plants and animals. Just because it's not a tropical rainforest doesn't mean nothing is growing there. Look more closely. If you are vision impaired, wait for the monsoons or the winter/spring rains to see the show of new leaves and flowers. Go out at night to see the arthropods out and about--just like the ones that you crushed in their burrows in the daytime. All play key roles in the desert ecosystem. You're informed now. Your "ignorance" (your term, not mine) is no longer an excuse. Please stick to the trails. ...Show more →
What about walking several miles out onto the salt flats in Death Valley or Mesquite Dunes? There's no trails there, yet, I would assume the Park is completely fine with people trekking out to these places.
Heck...simply camping in many of Joshua Tree's campgrounds will lead you to walking off trail since it's acceptable to explore the boulders.
If I have to question whether or not it is OK to walk in an area, i would most likely not do it. Knowing what you've told me, I will continue doing what I do.
01Ryan10 wrote:
What about walking several miles out onto the salt flats in Death Valley or Mesquite Dunes? There's no trails there, yet, I would assume the Park is completely fine with people trekking out to these places.
Heck...simply camping in many of Joshua Tree's campgrounds will lead you to walking off trail since it's acceptable to explore the boulders.
If I have to question whether or not it is OK to walk in an area, i would most likely not do it. Knowing what you've told me, I will continue doing what I do.
I think the obvious distinction is when there are signs or ropes to keep people on the trail vs areas where open exploration is permitted coupled with common sense (ie, don't go trampling a field of wildflowers just because walking is permitted there).
Moonshae wrote:
I think the obvious distinction is when there are signs or ropes to keep people on the trail vs areas where open exploration is permitted coupled with common sense (ie, don't go trampling a field of wildflowers just because walking is permitted there).
InnomnateViem wrote:
interesting. an invasive species by force takes the land of an indigenous people. setting up their rules and regulations that are contrary to the culture of the indigenous conquered peoples. the invasive species then complains about the violation of said imposed rules.
makes one wonder how the decimated few of the remaining indigenous people feel about those forced laws. a very interesting dichotomy, to say the least.
Iceland is one of the few lands that did not have Indigenous Peoples when Europeans arrived. So, your commentary doesn't apply to this place, which is the subject of this thread. However, it does apply to plenty of other places around the world.
Rest easy Thrice. After we exported 372 million tons of coal last year your carbon footprint is miniscule. I see this kind of 'get the photo at any cost' thing a lot. I have seen teenage girls lean far out of safari vehicles over snoozing lions so that their boy friend can take 'look at me' shots and I am always disgusted by the way some people turn locations into rubbish dumps. It is a brave person that calls them out on the spot, these days you could end up dead for your trouble. Yeah man, I sympathise with you.
tfoltz wrote:
I don’t feel you were wrong and I don’t care if the guy lived there 100 years what he did was wrong. Period. Nowadays in every type of photography or for that matter anything, there are self entitled people that do what they want when they want with no curtesy or thought of rules, regulations or other people...
I agree 100%.
I went to Moab with a group of offroad riders a few years ago. I explained to them clearly to stay on the trails, keep single track single and don't harm the environment. Even explained about the soil microorganisms that keep Moab looking like Moab. 1st ride out and guys are carving their own trails. We stopped, I told them to stay on the trails or go home. They made excuses why they were entitled to make their own trails, but they complied until we broke up into smaller groups in the afternoon. Those same guys went off trail again, but this time a ranger caught them in the act and they each got $150 fine.
No matter what the hobby, there are always idiots that think they are above the law.
Never hesitate to call them out when they are risking ruining future enjoyment of the landscape.
I went to Moab with a group of offroad riders a few years ago. I explained to them clearly to stay on the trails, keep single track single and don't harm the environment. Even explained about the soil microorganisms that keep Moab looking like Moab. 1st ride out and guys are carving their own trails. We stopped, I told them to stay on the trails or go home. They made excuses why they were entitled to make their own trails, but they complied until we broke up into smaller groups in the afternoon. Those same guys went off trail again, but this time a ranger caught them in the act and they each got $150 fine.
No matter what the hobby, there are always idiots that think they are above the law.
Never hesitate to call them out when they are risking ruining future enjoyment of the landscape. ...Show more →
I did not read every post but your point is valid. I was photographing orchids at a local conservatory when a person touched the leaves of the orchid and I, mistakenly too loudly, chastised her for touching the leaves of an orchid because the oils on the fingers of a humans hand will kill the leaves. I apologized to her for my blurting out but explained the facts. This is a fact.
Bringing an issue to the attention of a person is the correct thing to do. If they think they know more than you, then so be it.
Dustin Gent wrote:
The problem is that only something like 14 National Parks in the US have fee stations. So the money brought in from these parks that are the busiest are spread among all the parks (and maybe National Monuments as well). Then funding to NPS was cut last year.
So until we get another Roosevelt in office, I am afraid it will be this way, and also as you well know, Zion and Arches are looking at a Permit system to just enter the park.
35 National Parks charge entrance fees in the US. 115 locations administered by the NPS charge fees.
No, flying on an airplane is not the same as stomping on plants which the park specifically asked you not to do. I shouldn't have to make this point, but critical thinking is used by so few, I suppose I must.
Flying in an airplane does not have an obvious and measurable direct effect upon any particular plant life, whereas stomping on them to get a shot DEFINITELY does. Two, speculation and computer models are not proof, anymore than a weather forecast is proof. Third, assuming the present because of a prediction is not only a conclusion without evidence, it's intellectually lazy because you're assuming what you need to prove. Fourth, Al Gore's travel bills and his many mansions demonstrate that it's perfectly ok to jetset and be an eco-warrior -- either that, or it's junk science.
GregWCIL wrote:
Well, Thrice, it appears he was in the wrong. Having said that, I find it interesting that some people like you feel the need to call him out on it in a public forum. Yet, you say you have been to Iceland many times. Just wondering what your carbon footprint is for all that travel from Australia. Do you pretend your activities have no negative effects on the planet? My grandmother had an expression for that: "The pot calling the kettle black."
well i was a little off, but you can see the discrepancy between the different parks. They should just charge the same, and all charge. I buy the annual pass every year, and for $80 it is a deal, especially living in SLC and a days drive within a lot of parks
Cincy Bruce wrote:
I enjoy bird photography which has more ethics than you could imagine. The problem for bird photographers is the ethics police do not understand "a cropped image taken using a 800mm lens". The subject appears close so let's call everyone out.
As a general rule of thumb/my approach: Treat it as if the space were mine, and how would I feel having a handful of people shooting into my space? Yes, I still get angry watching others do as they please, but "I" will not be called out.
Bruce
What?? Who doesn't crop if need be? Who is stupid enough to be boxed in by the sensor dimensions? Who doesn't clone out a piece of another bird's tail intruding part way into the frame? What in the heck do those things have to do with ethics If you're associating with people with sicko ethics like those, it's time to find new associates.
Besides, the ethics subject in this thread has nothing to do with how you treat your images. It's about how you treat the environment.
If you're associating with people with sicko ethics like those, it's time to find new associates.