p.1 #1 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
Join fellow photographers in adopting and promoting principles to help preserve and protect the places we love and where we do our work. Here's a link to a new initiative and the principles it promotes: Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
Michael Bolino
Edwin Buske
Joe Cornish
Peter Cocksun
Gary Crabbe
Joshua Cripps
Candace Dyar
Michael Frye
Charlotte Gibb
Gary Hart
Ben Horne
QT Luong
Sarah Marino
Suzanne Mathia
Coleen Miniuk
Tim Parkin
Photo Cascadia
Aaron Reed
Joseph Rossbach
Adam Schallau
Guy Tal
Brenda Tharp
Floris van Breugel
p.1 #6 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
Beautiful image Dan, however Im more happy you posted about Natures First.
We’re at a point where landscape photography is more popular than ever. Increasingly Pushed forward by Social Media platforms and location sharing, we are beginning to see our obvious physical impact due to heavy visits to our National Parks and other precious areas. Landscape photography has already inched passed what our environment can repair on its own, let alone what existing agencies are resourced to repair. The time has come for us to educate one another on the impacts of our own footprints and Nature First is a necessary step forward.
My biggest appreciation for Nature’s First is it’s simplicity. Compressed into 7 easy steps for us to practice while out in the field photographing great scenes, as well as while at home frequenting our favorite Social Media platform.
Thanks again for posting this meaningful movement.
p.1 #7 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
I like this idea of a collective push to conserve nature as photographers. Ever since I saw Ben Horne do it, I make it a point to take a white trash bag with me whenever I go out shooting to pick up trash.
p.1 #8 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
Thanks everyone, especially for noting the positive and important influence of the "Nature First" initiative.
Virtually all of us who have spent much time in the field over a period of years or decades have noted some concerning changes. Man of us have re-thought our own actions and attitudes in light of these changes.
An initiative like "Nature First," especially when lots of us support it, adopt its principles, say so publicly, and act it ways consistent with its goals... can have a positive impact.
p.1 #10 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
Dustin Gent wrote:
I am glad that people are now saying something about it. But am wondering why just now?
I know a few of the folks who are part of the group, and they have been actively speaking about, writing about, and promoting good practices for quite a while. The "nature first" group may be new, but the concerns aren't entirely new. I know, for example, that Sarah Marino has been pretty vocal about this stuff for some time, and Guy Tal has, too. Some of the folks in my California landscape photography circle (several of whom are in the short list in my original post) have been concerned for quite a while. (I got my own "education" from one of them about 10 years back, and it changed my thinking about a lot of stuff.)
It also builds on some other initiatives that have been around for a while, for example explicitly connected photography with the Leave No Trace approach that has been on the radar for backcountry travelers for quite a while.
It occurs to me that some folks have made personal decisions about these things without necessarily speaking about it widely. One group of folks I photograph with (several in that list) recognized potential issues with our approach to a subject that we focus on, and we came to a mutual agreement about some actions we took as a group — and which we have not really described outside of the group. (In this case, the action was effective, and would have been less so if we had said too much.)
I have a personal story related to being circumspect about certain fragile places. I eventually got to know one of the founding photographers a few years back, and we photographed in a remote location that is this photographer knows well. One day as we made our way back from an out-of-the-way spot, this photographer — who now knew us well enough to trust us — said, more or less, "follow me, but only walk on rocks so we don't leave footprints," and took us to an unsuspected, moving, and fragile spot. (That was another step in my evolution towards being more careful about calibrating what I share and with whom, considering the potential impact on the subject.)
Also, the impact from over overuse and activities that damage the natural world has become more widely known. The internet, and in particular social media, has led much greater numbers of people to places that used to be quieter and less visited. On the plus side, the same social media tools have allowed like-minded folks to collaborate on projects like this more effectively.
Does that get at your question, or are you asking something different than what I interpreted?
p.1 #11 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
gdanmitchell wrote:
I know a few of the folks who are part of the group, and they have been actively speaking about, writing about, and promoting good practices for quite a while. The "nature first" group may be new, but the concerns aren't entirely new. I know, for example, that Sarah Marino has been pretty vocal about this stuff for some time, and Guy Tal has, too. Some of the folks in my California landscape photography circle have been concerned for quite a while. (I got my own "education" from one of them about 10 years back, and it changed my thinking about a lot of stuff.)
It also builds on some other initiatives that have been around for a while, for example explicitly connected photography with the Leave No Trace approach that has been on the radar for backcountry travelers for quite a while.
Also, I think that the impact over over-use and, in some cases, activities that damage the natural world has become more widely known. The internet, and in particular social media, has led much greater numbers of people to places that used to be quieter and less visited. On the plus side, the same social media tools have allowed like-minded folks to collaborate on projects like this more effectively.
Does that get at your question, or are you asking something different than what I interpreted?
Thanks for the insight! I don’t follow any photographers or groups/etc, so may have missed some of that. However I was getting at that I wish there was more of unified push for this maybe 10-15 years ago when photography started to get popular. Not that would have stopped all the disrespect/disregard, but might have educated some.
I have always picked up garbage since I was shooting back in the film days, but I don’t have a loud voice as many photographers do.
But I am glad that people are getting fed up enough to say something.
p.1 #12 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
Hey Dan,
Thanks for posting about this group. I never heard of it before, but I immediately signed up once I read about it. I've been an avid Sierra Club member since I was 16 and this group is a great way to combine our love for the natural places we visit and photograph while adding the additional commitment of telling others that we more than just photograph these places - we have a deep intimate respect for them and the wildlife that call it home.
I can't tell you how many times I've visited beautiful places and seen people throw their tripod legs on fragile tundra, or clean their lenses with tissue paper and toss the lens paper into the scene they just finished shooting. It doesn't happen often, but it happens enough and some places are so fragile that even mild ignorance can lead to damage that lasts centuries.
As a fisheries biologist for the State of California, I'm able to make it to some of the State's most beautiful watersheds and I always bring my camera. Unfortunately, I can often tell when other people have been to these fragile and primitive areas as well by the garbage they leave behind. I think one great way to reduce the damage to these locations is to support groups that support environmental responsibility and Nature First geared towards photographers is a great start.
Bill Samuels
p.1 #13 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
billsamuels wrote:
Hey Dan,
Thanks for posting about this group. I never heard of it before, but I immediately signed up once I read about it. I've been an avid Sierra Club member since I was 16 and this group is a great way to combine our love for the natural places we visit and photograph while adding the additional commitment of telling others that we more than just photograph these places - we have a deep intimate respect for them and the wildlife that call it home.
I can't tell you how many times I've visited beautiful places and seen people throw their tripod legs on fragile tundra, or clean their lenses with tissue paper and toss the lens paper into the scene they just finished shooting. It doesn't happen often, but it happens enough and some places are so fragile that even mild ignorance can lead to damage that lasts centuries.
As a fisheries biologist for the State of California, I'm able to make it to some of the State's most beautiful watersheds and I always bring my camera. Unfortunately, I can often tell when other people have been to these fragile and primitive areas as well by the garbage they leave behind. I think one great way to reduce the damage to these locations is to support groups that support environmental responsibility and Nature First geared towards photographers is a great start.
Bill Samuels ...Show more →
Thanks, Bill.
I think all of us can agree that bringing a bit more attention to these issues can only be a good thing for the natural scene that we all love so much... and which is the subject of our photographic work.
While there are a few problems "around the edges" caused by people who intentionally take steps (in person or online) to harm these resources, that is rarely (though occasionally, sadly) the biggest issue in our world of photographers. Here I think there might be two broad categories of problems.
1. Folks who mean well but aren't aware of the effect of their presence and the choices they make. In this group are usually well-meaning folks who do care about these places... but who simply haven't thought about their potential impact and the simple steps they can take to minimize it. Writing, sharing, good workshop leadership, and so forth often go a long ways with them.
2. Folks who give in to temptation when they want to "get the shot" and overlook the long term effects of what they do. This might involve simple choices about how to minimize their impact in getting that shot that might require a bit more effort, a decision that getting that shot is not more important than protecting the place, or something as simple as coming back another time when they can get it without creating damage.
There is no perfect solution but groups like this one — along with what each of us do and say — can go a long ways towards making things better.
(I don't know if you have noticed, but here and there in the online world, other photographers have recently posted and written articles referencing this group and exploring their principles.)
p.1 #14 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
Kane Engelbert wrote:
Beautiful image Dan, however Im more happy you posted about Natures First.
Thanks.
dalite wrote:
Yes, Michael Frye and Brenda Tharp.
Good photographers and good people.
01Ryan10 wrote:
I like this idea of a collective push to conserve nature as photographers. Ever since I saw Ben Horne do it, I make it a point to take a white trash bag with me whenever I go out shooting to pick up trash.
Ben's a good guy. Good photographer, too.
Dustin Gent wrote:
Thanks for the insight! I don’t follow any photographers or groups/etc, so may have missed some of that. However I was getting at that I wish there was more of unified push for this maybe 10-15 years ago when photography started to get popular. Not that would have stopped all the disrespect/disregard, but might have educated some.
I have always picked up garbage since I was shooting back in the film days, but I don’t have a loud voice as many photographers do.
But I am glad that people are getting fed up enough to say something.
Thanks, Dustin.
billsamuels wrote:
Thanks for posting about this group.
p.1 #15 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
Carol Leigh provides an instructive example here. More than a decade ago, she had been posting detailed information about photo locations that was very useful to people like me. I had a very time-demanding job and was just getting into my new hobby of digital photography. Her very detailed information was a godsend to me. In my few days off, I could use her information to quickly get to great spots for nature photography without using up days to find good locations.
Then disaster struck. One great spring she posted the prime locations for the best spring blooms that people had seen in years. Some of these areas were quite small and delicate, and some were on private land, but easy to photograph when standing next a fence. But these beautiful areas were then flooded by selfish, ambitious, photographers who trashed these places. They trampled down blooms, They broke through farm fences and trespassed on private property while horses and cattle wandered off. They drove off-road vehicles across the landscapes, criss-crossing the flowerscapes with tire tracks. They were joined by families who plopped themselves down in the middle of the nicest patches of flowers so they could roll around in the blooms and spread out their picnic blankets. Big areas of the flower show were ruined.
Carol Leigh repented and made amends. She replaced her location postings with well-publicized news releases about the horrendous trespassing and damage, which was picked up by the press. She initiated a new awareness about the need for conscientious nature photography. I, for one, am glad she changed her ways, even though it cost me a lot more time to find prime photo spots. But it made me learn how to figure these things out on my own. I also learned a lot from my explorations into new places, whether I captured special photos, or not.
p.1 #16 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
jdc562 wrote:
More than a decade ago, Carol Leigh had been posting information about photo locations that was very useful to people like me. I had a very time-demanding job and was just getting into my new hobby of digital photography. Her very detailed information was a godsend to me. In my few days off, I could use her information to find great spots for nature photography without using up days to find good locations.
Then disaster struck. One spring she posted the best locations for the best spring blooms people had seen in years. Some of these areas were quite small and delicate, and some were on private land, but easy to photograph when standing next a fence. But these beautiful areas were flooded by selfish, ambitious, photographers who trashed these places. They trampled down blooms, They broke through farm fences and trespassed on private property while horses and cattle wandered off. They drove off-road vehicles across the landscapes, criss-crossing the flowerscapes with tire tracks. They were joined by families who plopped themselves down in the middle of the nicest patches of flowers so they could roll around in the blooms and spread out their picnic blankets. Big areas of the flower show were ruined.
Carol Leigh repented and made amends. She replaced her location postings with well-publicized news releases about the horrendous trespassing and damage, which was picked up by the press. She initiated a new awareness about the need for conscientious nature photography. I, for one, am glad she changed her ways, even though it cost me a lot more time to find prime photo spots. But made me learn new ways to figure these things out on my own. I also learned a lot from my explorations into new places, whether I captured special photos, or not. ...Show more →
A lot of folks who used to be more forthcoming on the Internet and social media have changed their tune after seeing the reality of what happened. Call it a "conversion" if you will. We were more naive about this stuff "back in the day." Many of us come from a pre-web era when you pretty much could tell folks about things and not worry much about the effect.
I was first called out by a longtime Yosemite NP ranger with whom I photograph. We were part of a small group photographing in the high country of the park, and he told others in the group that my posting habits at that time raised a red flag for him — he did not want to bring me along to a particular location because he was concerned that I would say too much on my website. He had personally been involved in situations like the one you mention, and he was concerned that my posts (at that time only on a website — pre-social media) might have the same effect.
I was initially taken aback, but eventually I was grateful that he opened this discussion. He convinced me to not always name photograph locations, and he pointed out that the photographs will stand on their own without location specifics in many cases. (I learned more than just this from my friend. He also, with a single sentence one afternoon, gave me an entirely new insight on how to find subjects in places I thought were familiar. He also knows more about the Sierra than anyone I've met... and he has a dangerous sense of humor. ;-)
We still go to these places. We share photographs of them. We write about them. (I wrote a book about one area in my own state, and a friend is the author of another well-known book about another location... and we have all thought long and hard about how to reconcile that with these concerns.)
The object here is simply to do what we can to make things a bit better, right?
p.1 #17 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
I think what existed a few years ago, and somewhat today, is a sense that by going out to an under-explored or rarely used location and writing about it or some attribute located there, the small amount of damage you're doing results in long-term protection in the area by some means.
In other words, there are magnificent places in the high-Sierras and up until recently, they were well used. Photographers would go out and take photos, write articles, get them published with the idea that by bringing people here and having them also fall in love with such locations, they would in return, support preservation by giving to non-profits that work on preservation like the Sierra Club or the Nature Conservancy, but there are many others. Also, people are more likely to write their Senators/Congressmen when a bill is either going to benefit an area nearby or a general bill to provide more funding, or quite the opposite where large amounts of money would be taken away, kind of like our current situations.
Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but the question is whether its worth sacrafising an area for the long-term benefit?
Especially today when younger generations are spending a large amount of free time sitting in front of a computer instead of learning how to rock climb, camp, and photograph, even if it's just for fun. Who will fund our natural places when these issues come up and such a large computer-geek generation doesn't even know where Yosemite is?
Here's the question, when do you provide the location information and when do you not? What will be the long term benefit by doing so, if it even exists?
I'm recovering from hip replacement surgery, but I'm hoping to run up to northern California to an area I just found out that there are so many Bald eagles that it's extremely rare to not find them all around you. I don't have any plans on telling anyone where it is, but it's on a lake that many Californian's know of and not for the bald eagles. I'll post the photos here after I make it there, but probably not with a location unless someone really asked me by email.
I do hope that this group spreads around FM and elsewhere because despite it's imperfection, something is better than nothng.
At least this group is headed in the right direction!
p.1 #18 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
gdanmitchell wrote:
We were more naive about this stuff "back in the day.
Not much has changed, judging from many posts here in the Landscape section. Even if the OP doesn't mention the location of a photo, you can bet your behind that there will always be one who will ask "Isn't that the meadow up at Mt. Takeyourpick that you can only reach by driving up this particular forest road?".
p.1 #20 · Nature First — The Alliance for Responsible Nature Photography
billsamuels wrote:
I think what existed a few years ago, and somewhat today, is a sense that by going out to an under-explored or rarely used location and writing about it or some attribute located there, the small amount of damage you're doing results in long-term protection in the area by some means.
That matches my perspective. I've been traveling through and photographing the Sierra for a long time. (Yes, that long — back before things like wilderness permits existed.) Back then the concern was that not enough people knew about the Sierra backcountry and shared a concern for protecting it. This was back when we contended with stuff like the following:
- a proposal from Disney (!) to turn Mineral King into a ski area.
- a state proposal to put in an all-year highway across the range (and the JMT) to Mammoth Lakes south of Yosemite.
In those days, it was important to, for example, specifically identify the places that were under threat of development in order to build support for protecting them. And back then — no internet! no Google! no Instagram! — the reach and shelf life of most public sharing were not that great. You might write someone a letter, perhaps give a talk to some group.
There are some analogs today. For example, as Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments have been threatened, some people have used carefully selected imagery and stories to increase the awareness of what could be lost. On balance, in cases like those, presenting visual information about these places seems to be worth the risk given the immediate threat.
On the other hand, we have to realize that the new "sharing economy" — with its huge reach, tagging and organizing of everything, and powerful searching — leverages even somewhat innocuous sharing of the sort that had little effect a few decades ago. It now does have an effect that goes much farther and reaches folks who too often use the info in unfortunate ways. (I once innocuously shared a photograph of a less-known and fragile feature in a US national park... and the replies included a bunch of photographs of people doing things to the feature that threatened it existentially. That was a shock, and another reason for my own change of heart about sharing too much.)
PhilPDX wrote:
Not much has changed, judging from many posts here in the Landscape section. Even if the OP doesn't mention the location of a photo, you can bet your behind that there will always be one who will ask "Isn't that the meadow up at Mt. Takeyourpick that you can only reach by driving up this particular forest road?".
-Phil
True, that does happen.
Two facts remain, though.
1. Our inability to make things perfect doesn't argue against trying to make them better.
2. The "Mt. TakeYourPick" (or "Mt. TakeYourPic?") response aside, decreasing unsustainable attention on thus-far-not-popular places is more good than bad.
It is also a strategy that can be used selectively and thoughtfully. For example, location could given be "Northern Utah" or "Eastern Sierra" or "Canadian Rockies" rather than some specific spot. And this is likely more important in the cases of places that are currently not well-known and which cannot sustain a lot more user impact. That's different than identifying your latest Half Dome photograph as being in Yosemite Valley. ;-) (And, you could still choose to share, directly and in person, with a small number of trusted friends whose values convince you that they share your concerns and will act accordingly.)
Finally, there's more to this than not naming places. A visit to the "Nature First" site can explain more.
Best regards,