THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE WANTS TO FINE YOU $1,000 FOR TAKING PICTURES IN THE FOREST

it's due to sloppy fact checking or research . . . the result of the bottom dollar mentality prevalent across nearly all America these days. We experience it in this industry and (some) think it is somehow unique to what we do. Mainstream media is worshiping the almighty dollar just as our clients are. Just as most commodities are.

How long do your pants last these days?

What kind of junk are they brewing your beer with?

joedlh wrote in post #17178576
The idea of the permit process is to make sure that the commercial crew has the proper insurance and to determine to what extent it might interfere with the public. Also to clean up after yourself. You can't film in NYC without a permit. While wilderness areas don't have a lot of people around, a large crew can have an impact on the ecological balance. Wilderness areas are declared as such in order to preserve the wilderness.

rest easy citizen, the government knows what is best for you

WhidbeyHiker wrote in post #17180863
I'll agree that there is a element of both.

But the media, news crews, are not considered commercial usage. Its not like the blog you read this on has a vested interest in whether a movie crew has to pay a fee.

joedlh wrote in post #17178576
You can't film in NYC without a permit.

Ye, but I see people shooting hawks in Central Park and selling their photos all the time.
I dont think all the Asian wedding photogs got permits as well.

Gomar wrote in post #17188992
Ye, but I see people shooting hawks in Central Park and selling their photos all the time.
I dont think all the Asian wedding photogs got permits as well.

Just because you later sell a print doesnt automatically qualify it as a commercial shoot. Given that the definition of nearly every term used in a law is exhaustively parsed in the Code of Federal Regulations it would be helpful to see how commercial is defined.