It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Forest Service says media needs photography permit in wilderness areas, alarming First Amendment adv

page: 1
32
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+8 more 
posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:23 PM
link   




"If you were engaged on reporting that was in support of wilderness characteristics, that would be permitted," Close said.

The First Amendment prohibits the creation of laws that abridge press freedom. Asked whether the Forest Service believes its rule violates the First Amendment, Close replied: "It does not apply to breaking news."

Forest Service says media needs photography permit in wilderness areas, alarming First Amendment advocates

In essence they are saying only people who report in ways that make the Forest Service look good are allowed to take photos.

It is a vagrant attempt to ignore the Constitution yet again by a government agency.

With the daily headlines here it comes as no surprise, but we need to make sure this is not allowed. This also seems to be Agenda 21 creeping into us policies.




posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
The first time this goes to court it will be thrown out.

Someone is abusing their power - as is so common with government officials these days.

Government officials, when left unchecked, become lawless. This is a theme repeated throughout history, and is a bane on society.

This is censorship at its finest, and needs to come to a stop.

edit on 24-9-2014 by MentorsRiddle because: (no reason given)


+10 more 
posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: pianopraze


Turn about is fair play. I want the Government to apply for an intrusion permit to data mine my life.

Des



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: pianopraze

Being that you brought up Agenda21, I am curious as to whether or not these wilderness areas are part of UNESCO's World Heritage Sites?

Hmmmmmm, interesting development for sure.



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

As far as I know, no they are not.

...and since when do you need a permit to shoot photos in a wilderness area, or a nat'l. park? someone overstepped themselves, big time.



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
As if the Forest Service has that authority, They have the Authority to maintain the forest, and they better get back to work. LOL Last I checked the forest doesnt stop growing



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

I see a constant barrage of laws aimed at US property rights and "reclaiming" water right as Agenda 21 being implemented.

It is happening on the state and federal levels.

There are too many threads to count or link here on ATS. The guy making a pond. The family collecting rain water off their house come instantly to mind. I'm mobile so it is hard to link but easily searchable

edit on 24-9-2014 by pianopraze because: Correcting autocorrect



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

You peaked my curiosity so I went and did a search.

Here is a list of the US wilderness areas that fall under UNESCO's World Heritage Sites.

Yellowstone National Park
Everglades National Park
Grand Canyon National Park
Kluane / Wrangell-St. Elias / Glacier Bay / Tatshenshini-Alsek # * 9
Redwood National and State Parks
Mammoth Cave National Park
Olympic National Park
Great Smoky Mountains National Park
Yosemite National Park #
Hawaii Volcanoes National Park #
Carlsbad Caverns National Park
Waterton Glacier International Peace Park *

UNESCO



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963


I stand corrected.

That'll teach me to act like an all knowing bird...


thanks.



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   
from the article;



The U.S. Forest Service has tightened restrictions on media coverage in vast swaths of the country's wild lands, requiring reporters to pay for a permit and get permission before shooting a photo or video in federally designated wilderness areas.

Under rules being finalized in November, a reporter who met a biologist, wildlife advocate or whistleblower alleging neglect in any of the nation's 100 million acres of wilderness would first need special approval to shoot photos or videos even on an iPhone.

Permits cost up to $1,500, says Forest Service spokesman Larry Chambers, and reporters who don't get a permit could face fines up to $1,000.



WoW



Somebody in the Obama Administration is jealous and trembling !!

What *ARE* They Hiding?




edit on Sep-24-2014 by xuenchen because:




posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   
I''ll tell you why they don't want pictures taken. Although the linked article repeatedly uses the term Forest or Forestry Service, they are leaving out that the US forest service is an agency of the US department of Agriculture. Forests are no longer preserved under their banner but seen as product reserved for corporations.


The history of the Forest Service has been fraught with controversy, as various interests and national values have grappled with the appropriate management of the many resources within the forests. These values and resources include grazing, timber, mining, recreation, wildlife habitat, and wilderness.

Forest Service Department of Agriculture


Nowadays, the wilderness areas formerly preserved under the law are just another agricultural product. Ranger Rick is an employee of large corporate American interests, not a protector of the forests. Can't have anyone filming the Logging, Fracking or Mining going on now, can we?



edit on 24-9-2014 by intrptr because: added pic



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen
That is exactly what I was thinking, What are they hiding?

The selling off of the trees, that's what their hiding.

I say everyone needs to start hiking in these areas, with camera, and post pictures everywhere on the net. What are they going to do? Arrest every blogger as a reporter?



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: seagull

You peaked my curiosity so I went and did a search.

Here is a list of the US wilderness areas that fall under UNESCO's World Heritage Sites.

Yellowstone National Park
Everglades National Park
Grand Canyon National Park
Kluane / Wrangell-St. Elias / Glacier Bay / Tatshenshini-Alsek # * 9
Redwood National and State Parks
Mammoth Cave National Park
Olympic National Park
Great Smoky Mountains National Park
Yosemite National Park #
Hawaii Volcanoes National Park #
Carlsbad Caverns National Park
Waterton Glacier International Peace Park *

UNESCO


On the UNESCO list various places are marked in red. The only one in the US that has the red marker is the Everglades. I couldn't find anything on the site that said what the red marker denotes.
Anyone know? I was speculating that the ones marked may be a refuge for endangered species.



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: seagull

You peaked my curiosity so I went and did a search.

Here is a list of the US wilderness areas that fall under UNESCO's World Heritage Sites.

Yellowstone National Park
Everglades National Park
Grand Canyon National Park
Kluane / Wrangell-St. Elias / Glacier Bay / Tatshenshini-Alsek # * 9
Redwood National and State Parks
Mammoth Cave National Park
Olympic National Park
Great Smoky Mountains National Park
Yosemite National Park #
Hawaii Volcanoes National Park #
Carlsbad Caverns National Park
Waterton Glacier International Peace Park *

UNESCO



That's a hell of a lot of land.

But where are:

JellyStone
BrickleBerry

Now THOSE mean war!


Peace



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 02:59 PM
link   
I bet this is aimed primarily at citizen journalism. Note they specified...




first need special approval to shoot photos or videos even on an iPhone


... in the article.

Either way, it's ridiculous. and if they tried to stop me, I would pull out my copy of the constitution and ask them where in the first amendment it specifies that it is not applicable to breaking news.

I could also see it being their way of trying to limit exposure to BS with situations like the Bundy Ranch fiasco.
edit on 24-9-2014 by Jomina because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
from the article;



Permits cost up to $1,500, says Forest Service spokesman Larry Chambers, and reporters who don't get a permit could face fines up to $1,000.


So a permit costs 500 more than a fine?

It truly is easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission...


Peace



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy
The legend gives numbers for such categories as "Transboundary", "Delisted", "Cultural", "Natural"...etc...
The category for "In Danger" shows 19... There appear to be 19 red dots on the map.



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Good question!

I tried to find out what it means but I can't find anything on it......

EDIT: Apparently it means "Sites that are in Danger"........


edit on 24-9-2014 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: pianopraze

If it is as the OP reports, this is a very strange law that probably a lot of higher level officials have never heard about. Now that it's gone public I expect it to be withdrawn post haste by someone higher up the food chain. Since every phone is a camera, they are saying that Little Jimmy can't film mommy and daddy trying to pet the grizzly? No way to enforce this nonsense, let alone prosecute anyone with a straight face.




edit on 24-9-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Could it have some thing to do with Big Foot
Or just greed ? The fed is constantly looking to get as
much money as possible.



new topics




 
32
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join