outdoor alliance position on national forest filming

8/10/2019 Outdoor Alliance position on National Forest filming

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/outdoor-alliance-position-on-national-forest-filming 1/5

December 3, 2014

Mary WagnerAssociate Chief, U.S. Forest ServiceCommercial Filming in WildernessAttn: Wilderness & Wild and Scenic Rivers201 14 th St. SW, Mailstop Code: 1124Washington, DC 20250-1124

Via email: [email protected]

Re: Commercial Filming in Wilderness

Dear Ms. Wagner:

Outdoor Alliance is a coalition of five national, member-based organizationsrepresenting the human powered outdoor recreation community. The coalition includesAccess Fund, American Canoe Association, American Whitewater, InternationalMountain Bicycling Association, and Winter Wildlands Alliance and represents theinterests of the millions of Americans who climb, paddle, mountain bike, and

backcountry ski and snowshoe on our nation’s public lands, waters, and snowscapes.

Our members share a deep concern with preserving the Wilderness characteristics ofdesignated landscapes; many also engage in activities that would potentially be affectedby the Forest Service’s Proposed Directive for Commercial Filming in Wilderness.

Outdoor Alliance commends the Forest Service for taking steps to ensure consistentstandards for the evaluation of permit applications for Wilderness filming. Weunderstand that the Forest Service faces a difficult task in implementing mandates fromthe Wilderness Act and the Act of May 26, 2000, (16 U.S.C. 460l-6d) that may limit theagency’s discretion in allowing, without a permit, certain small-scale commercial filmingpractices that are nevertheless likely to have little if any effect on the Wildernesslandscape or the experience of other Forest users. These mandates, in some cases,reflect an outdated conception of both the technology involved in the capture of imagesas well as the opportunities that exist for small-scale, but arguably commercial,dissemination of those images. As explained below, we hope that the Forest Service willuse the opportunity of integration of this directive to look for ways to reduce theadministrative burden for small-scale filmers as well as for the agency itself.



Commercial Filming

With advances in technology for the capture of still and moving images, the ability tocreate commercial-quality imagery is now in significantly more people’s hands than itwas even 15 years ago. Cameras capable of creating very high quality still and movingimages are cheaper and smaller than ever before. DSLR cameras are able to shootamazingly high-quality video, to say nothing of small, user-worn video cameras likeGoPros (which also can be used to capture still images). High frame rate video camerasshoot a series of images, each of which is of high enough quality to function as a stillimage on its own. Conversely, enthusiasts with DSLRs often shoot a series of stillimages that are later combined to create “time-lapse” videos. These technologicalimprovements blur, if not obliterate, the distinction between still and moving imageswhile reducing the impact on the landscape likely in the capture of either.

Of even greater significance than changes in the technology for image capture are

changes in the landscape for dissemination and, in some cases, monetization of thoseimages. Today, an outdoor recreationist or adventure sports athlete might shoot a shortvideo and post it to a blog containing advertising or through social media channels likeFacebook, Twitter, or Instagram, potentially “tagging” sponsors who provide him or herwith equipment or a small income. Athletes engaged in this type of activity are oftenincredibly prolific, posting videos as often as daily and creating no greater impact to thelandscape than another user who chooses not to engage in filming.

Most, if not all, of these films carry a message “about the use and enjoyment ofwilderness” in that they show fun, healthy opportunities for outdoor recreation in apristine landscape. They help generate enthusiasm about outdoor recreation, the way inwhich most Americans experience their public lands and a key way in which participantscome to appreciate the outdoors and develop a conservation and stewardship ethic.They are also likely to “advertise [a] product or service,” however, in that they mayinclude a sponsor’s logo or showcase the use of a sponsor’s product.

All of this is to say that what “commercial filming” looks like as an activity occurring onthe landscape is, today, often vastly different than the large-footprint productions familiarto the drafters of the Wilderness Act or even the Act of May 26, 2000 of May 26, 2000.Taking account of these changes, the Forest Service should ensure that the focal pointfor any filming restrictions is the impacts of the activity on the landscape and the

experience of other users. In order to accomplish this, the agency must modernize itsconceptions of both filming and what constitutes commercial use while still stayingwithin the bounds of what is allowable under the Wilderness Act.



Filming Directive

The Forest Service undeniably faces a difficult task in squaring the requirements of theWilderness Act and the Act of May 26, 2000, with the current media landscape. We areextremely pleased to see Chief Tidwell’s statement in his November 4 memorandumthat:

Commercial film and photography permit fees should be primarily viewedas land-use fees. If the activity presents no more impact on the land thanthat of the general public, then it shall be exempt from permitrequirements.

We wholeheartedly agree that the only sound basis for leveling permitting requirementsand fees is the effect of the activity on the landscape or on the experience of otherForest users. We believe, however, that the directive, and possibly Forest Service

regulations, requires revision in order to ensure that, in keeping with Chief Tidwell’sintent, Forest impacts are the touchstone for permitting requirements and not asomewhat arbitrary commercial/noncommercial distinction.

In particular, we believe that the Forest Service should address several elements under45.1c - Evaluation of Proposals:

First, regarding 5(a), the word “recreational” should be added to the list of acceptableprimary objectives, so that the revised criteria would read “a. Has a primary objective ofdissemination of information about the use and enjoyment of wilderness or itsecological, geological, recreational or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, orhistorical value (16 U.S.C. 1131(a) and (b)) .” While recreation is encompassed by theterm “enjoyment,” adding the word recreation clarifies the section with regard to animportant Wilderness value.

Second, the criteria in 5(c) should be rewritten to provide better clarity and allowance forwilderness filming where no suitable alternative locations exist outside Wilderness, orwhen the best location is inside Wilderness. For example, an outfitter or guide operatingexclusively in Wilderness may wish to film clients participating guided activities andwould not reasonably be able to film at an alternative location. Similarly, a filmmakerwishing to create a film about paddling a particular river or climbing a certain peak—and

not just paddling or climbing generally—may not pass the criteria as currently written.Third, the criteria requiring that a permitted film “Would not advertise any product orservice” (5(g)), must be materially revised. While a blanket prohibition may be effectivein ensuring that large-scale commercial shoots ( e.g. , a television commercial), do notoccur in Wilderness areas, as 5(g) is currently worded, it is overly broad and has thepotential to not only unduly affect small-scale film production, but also the various ways



these small scale productions directly benefit specific Wilderness areas and Wildernessas a concept.

As discussed above, the media production landscape has undergone significantchanges in recent years. A film aimed at celebrating Wilderness uses and values ordelivering an educational message is far more likely to be produced with the financialbacking of a business in the outdoor industry—and include some incidental advertisingfor that business, for example through display of the business’s logos or use of thecompany’s products—than to be created through private financing with costs to berecouped through ticket or video sales. This business model has the effect ofdemocratizing media production and makes possible myriad creative and positive filmsthat would not be financially viable without some advertising component.

In light of the current and evolving media landscape, and to ensure that these valuablefilms—which help to advance the cause of Wilderness, stewardship, and conservation,

as well as appreciation for outdoor recreation and the outdoors—can continue to bemade, the blanket prohibition on advertising products or services should either be struckfrom the directive, or the 5(g) criteria should be clarified to state that advertisements arenot prohibited where they do not constitute the primary message of the media piece. 1

* * *

Outdoor Alliance has tried to restrict our comments here to the scope of the proposeddirective for evaluating permit applications for commercial filming in Wilderness. It isclear that this proposal has drawn significant attention to ancillary issues relating towhen permits are required to engage in filming activities, and we are encouraged thatthe Forest Service has already recognized this overwhelming level of interest as asignal that it may be appropriate to revisit related regulations in light of many of thechanges to the media landscape discussed above. We appreciate the opportunity tocomment on the integration of the proposed directive and look forward to working with

1 Additionally, the 5(g) prohibition, as currently worded, would potentially prohibit a permittedWilderness guide service from filming an advertisement for the services it is legally licensed toprovide.



the Forest Service to ensure a robust media landscape that retains strong protectionsfor Wilderness.

Best regards,

Adam CramerExecutive DirectorOutdoor Alliance

cc: Brady Robinson, Executive Director, Access FundWade Blackwood, Executive Director, American Canoe AssociationMark Singleton, Executive Director, American WhitewaterMike Van Abel, Executive Director, International Mountain Bicycling AssociationMark Menlove, Executive Director, Winter Wildlands AllianceLee Davis, Executive Director, The MazamasMartinique Grigg, Executive Director, The Mountaineers

outdoor alliance position on national forest filming

Documents