What is your acceptable ‘damage’ to the environment to get a shot?

I haven't been too many national parks. Most of my experience is with the small ponds and lakes in my area. i guess the same things apply. I tend to leave things how I saw them. A lot of the little ponds in my area have a trail around them with lots of foot prints on them. One good rain and they're wiped away. There are also at least a few local photographers I've seen out and about.

I may just be speaking for myself here, but I think the reason why people who arent 'green' in their daily lives take care in natural areas is because parks and reserves are meant to be left largely untouched. They're meant to just be raw nature. I won't say completely untouched because people do visit them and hike and camp, but the area is still supposed to remain clean. YellowStone is huge. Only a very small portion of it sees regular tourists. Of course, I've never been. I'm only basing that statement on a few documentaries I've seen on it. (I do intend to go someday) I don't worship the planet, but I do like animals and like to take care of them and where they live when I can.

I apply the standard "what if everybody did it?". My footprint or twig snapping may not matter, but what happens if hundreds or thousands of people do the same thing? It's kind of like voting.

Sometimes you don’t know what damage you’re doing. In underwater photography simply touching any part of the live reef will kill it (oils in your skin) and over the years have destroyed entire reef systems because of divers simply laying their hand on what they think is a rock to steady themselves.
There are probably some analogs to above-water environment’s that we may not even know about yet. It was only recently (40 years ago) that people knew of the reef damage they caused.

kingdaddy wrote in post #17449509
Sometimes you don’t know what damage you’re doing. In underwater photography simply touching any part of the live reef will kill it (oils in your skin) and over the years have destroyed entire reef systems because of divers simply laying their hand on what they think is a rock to steady themselves.
There are probably some analogs to above-water environment’s that we may not even know about yet. It was only recently (40 years ago) that people knew of the reef damage they caused.

Alpine tundra is equally fragile. A plant whose leaves only spread 4 inches and which is less that 1 inch tall can have roots that extend 4 feet down and can take 30 or 40 years to reach that stage, because the growing season is really only a couple of months long. One careless step and it's gone. In an area like Trail Ridge Road in Rocky Mountain National Park, there are several stopping places and overlooks which are well above treeline, and these are the places where there are always signs and cautions about staying on the trails. Any time I'm above treeline, I'm aware of where I put my feet. I walk on rocks where possible, step lightly elsewhere, avoid obviously flowering plants and try to keep to grassy areas. I've spent many days hiking in the high Colorado mountains, and I only leave the trail in areas where nobody else goes. I do all that I can to leave no sign of my passing.

I only go by a few simple rules. I try not to damage anything, I try not to adversely disrupt wildlife and I don't drop litter.

mpix345 wrote in post #17428382
I apply the standard "what if everybody did it?". My footprint or twig snapping may not matter, but what happens if hundreds or thousands of people do the same thing? It's kind of like voting.

Just came upon this thread, and reading from the beginning - one point seemed to be missing - and this was it. It's not about that one twig, or one set of footprints - but if everyone coming across the same area treated it the same way, it wouldn't take long for everything to be under foot, and no twigs left to snap.

Yes, but it does come down to balancing 'what if' with reality. Where I was in Yellowstone could become inundated if more people knew about it; and if everyone did what I did, what is now a completely erased footprint (or three) would be a complete mess. While I think it was a mistake, my footprints are a distant memory (and yes in some areas leaving even footprints is not good - think a wet racetrack in Death Valley).

However, if I think about places I've been, in Alaska for instance, sure if 10k people a year went hiking there (even just outside Anchorage and very accessible) the tundra would be a mess as Rick points out. Am I not going to walk off-trail across the tundra because if everyone in Anchorage did it it would be a mess? No, reality is that maybe 1-2 people a month hike around there and it looks pristine.

But fundamentally I agree. It reminds me of the Lady who stepped of the boardwalk to get a photo in front of Great Fountain Geyser in Yellowstone (and many do in front of Fountain geyser). There is a grassy patch there, so really no damage to be done. But of course all the crowed started shouting at her and heckling ever louder because he was clearly not going to just get back on the boardwalk. Point being that while one person doing that isn't really a problem, if everyone who even wanted to did it, the place would quickly look a mess and certainly spoil some photographs.

Certainly my Great Fountain shots would have been better if I would have stepped onto that grassy patch and I've been there with no-one else around. But no way am I doing that.

So in this sense I will never do something like that to get a shot - stepping off a boardwalk or trail etc.. that is heavily used that you are asked to say on. Footprints in the wrong place can encourage everyone else to think it is OK. It sets a bad precedent and poor example and it seems to me it says 'I think me/my shot shot is more important than everyone else's'. I think once you get that in your head (and I suspect many do from what I have seen) you are on a very slippery slope to not respecting the environment.

Ed - thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say, but in re-reading fell short of in my post. I hope my comment didn't come across as a direct criticism of your actions, as it wasn't intended - more of a general statement. You also raise a valid point - in that all things must be kept in perspective, as such that stepping off a trail in a remote, infrequently traveled area is certainly not anywhere in the same comparison as the example you gave of the grass area at the Great Fountain at Yellowstone ( still have to make a trip there someday). I think most photographers and photography enthusiasts share the general mind set of leaving things as they found them, unfortunately as with many things in life - those who do not tend to set a bad example that paints the rest with the same brush.

BigLobowski wrote in post #17461218
I hope my comment didn't come across as a direct criticism of your actions, as it wasn't intended - more of a general statement.

Not at all, I didn't take it that way.

I'm glad this thread has continued without being judgmental which was my hope. I just mentioned my actions again in part to encourage anyone else to share an example of something they might have looked back at and though 'Hmm, maybe I shouldn't have done that' and not feel like they are going to get bashed. The other part was that it was just relevant to the idea that just leaving footprints is not necessarily harmless everywhere - if everyone does it in particular.

Even if we all have the best intentions, sometimes we do things that we probably shouldn't. If we learn from them and from others we'll do better next time. Perhaps realizing that it is not a black-and-white issue means we should at least thing about it every time we go out.

Actually the footprint issue reminds me it is also one 'we/I' face in Moab/Canyonlands country with the cryptobiotic soil. IMO it's a somewhat similar issue. There are certain places where if everyone walked on it the erosion would be really bad. However, I am of the (somewhat scientific) opinion that the soil isn't quite a delicate as is sometimes touted. (As with Yellowstone which stand up to quite a few bison roaming through some of those areas). There are many more largish animals than you might think roaming around Canyonlands and all the cattle outside of the actual park. So in certain while I will generally trying to stay in washes and on the slickrock, I will step on the soil. In more visited areas I'm really careful not to step on the soil at all. Also my wife and I get fanatical with the kids about not stepping on the soil. It's not like we necessarily think that one step is that bad, but more like we want to train them to think about the 'little' things in the particular environment they are in, which in some places includes where you put your feet.

ejenner wrote in post #17464058
I am of the (somewhat scientific) opinion that the soil isn't quite a delicate as is sometimes touted.

I would be interested in hearing the "somewhat scientific" portion of your argument.

I am careful as I can be, within reason... but I pretty much go wherever I want, whenever I want... I don't much care for rules, never have. I use my common sense and that seems to be working just fine for me.

The adage that "if everyone did something" is flawed... not everyone does, or will. Besides, I generally shy away from the areas that get massive traffic - I don't like people.

I go to places where there is nobody. If I break a twig there, I don't care.

Sue me.

Sorry, not to try and sound callous, but it's pretty close to the truth.

Todd Lambert wrote in post #17499422
I am careful as I can be, within reason... but I pretty much go wherever I want, whenever I want... I don't much care for rules, never have. I use my common sense and that seems to be working just fine for me.

The adage that "if everyone did something" is flawed... not everyone does, or will. Besides, I generally shy away from the areas that get massive traffic - I don't like people.

I go to places where there is nobody. If I break a twig there, I don't care.

Sue me.

Sorry, not to try and sound callous, but it's pretty close to the truth.

This makes me think more about "if a bear breaks a branch...." or a deer, or a moose. If an animal in nature can debark a tree because it is marking its territory, then why can't I, as an animal, work it just a bit to my benefit?

Ultimately it comes down to following the rules of the parks and forests you're visiting. If they don't want you going off trail somewhere, there's a reason. The conservationists who work at these places and determine what's permissible and what isn't aren't dummies. "Take only pictures, leave only footprints" is fine generally, but would you go tramping around the microbial mats at the grand prismatic springs in yellowstone for a shot? I would hope not. Those types of places- like the cryptobiotic soil of moab (Don't Bust The Crust!) are highly delicate ecosystems that will not "self-repair" for a very, very long time. On a broader theme, think of the rules of golf- play it as it lies. If you can't get the shot you want without following the rules or disturbing the environment, you're trying to get the wrong shot. It worries me when I see the NFS kicking around ideas about charging photographers to take pictures- if we don't mind our P's and Q's BETTER than everyone else, we'll end up getting the brunt of the blowback.

Incidentally, here's a shot of a tourist at yellowstone getting WAY too close to the wildlife, which I see every single time I go there, and it drives me nuts: (ps I was using a rather long lens and was well away.)

Todd Lambert wrote in post #17499422
I am careful as I can be, within reason... but I pretty much go wherever I want, whenever I want... I don't much care for rules, never have. I use my common sense and that seems to be working just fine for me.

The adage that "if everyone did something" is flawed... not everyone does, or will. Besides, I generally shy away from the areas that get massive traffic - I don't like people.

I go to places where there is nobody. If I break a twig there, I don't care.

Sue me.

Sorry, not to try and sound callous, but it's pretty close to the truth.

This makes me sad.

I felt like the attitude that this thread is about "whether you can walk on the moss, or break a twig" was going a little hyperbolic and off base... The concern and the realities being just a bit bigger than a twig.


Then I recalled this;

IMAGE LINK: http://jakehegnauer.ze​nfolio.com/p245759215/​e577f9ebe

IMAGE LINK: http://jakehegnauer.ze​nfolio.com/p245759215/​e577f9ed2

IMAGE LINK: http://jakehegnauer.ze​nfolio.com/p245759215/​e577f9f06

IMAGE LINK: http://jakehegnauer.ze​nfolio.com/p245759215/​e577f9ec6

IMAGE LINK: http://jakehegnauer.ze​nfolio.com/p245759215/​e577f9eb4

IMAGE LINK: http://jakehegnauer.ze​nfolio.com/p245759215/​e577f9f28

IMAGE LINK: http://jakehegnauer.ze​nfolio.com/p245759215/​e577f9eac