Menu
News
Latest News
Desert Racing
Rally Raid
Short Course Racing
Product Reviews
Featured Vehicles
Shop Tours
Story Time
Press Releases
Forum
New posts
Search forums
Classifieds
Video
Calendar
Store
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forum
membership
has its advantages....
Forum
Off-Road Racing Community
Desert Racing
New BLM Rules
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EQuin" data-source="post: 58845" data-attributes="member: 111"><p>Alright, I can understand the pallet deal, but no photos or filming without a permit? That's ridiculous! Did they cite the specific regulation for the camera permit? It would look something like this - 8 C.F.R. 212, for instance (I just made the numbers up, but all federal regulations are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations - the first number is the Title of the Code, and the 2nd number after the acronym is the specific section or part under the title). I'm just interested in seeing what the actual regulation says, assuming it's already been promulgated by the BLM. If it's simply being proposed (i.e., not yet a formal regulation), then please let me know. I'd like to comment on it before it gets formally promulgated. When I go to a race with my daughter, I definitely intend to take pics to cherish the moments with her later on.</p><p></p><p>I can understand charging a fee and requiring a hunter or a fisherman to apply for a permit, or a rancher to get one to graze cattle on public land, or a logging company to get one to harvest trees on public land. Those activities involve the actual use of public resources requiring compensation for their use and taking.</p><p></p><p>But pictures? Come on. That's stretching it in my opinion. What public resources are being used up by taking pics or filming public land?</p><p></p><p>And if they're mad about profits being made, they should realize that the pics and videos being sold focus more on the racers and their race vehicles than on the publicly-owned landscape. Why were they not so upset over the hundreds of calendars sold each year showing beautiful photos of federal parks like Yellowstone, Big Bend, etc.? They feel threatened by a fledgling industry of a few young race fans who want to sell videos of racers who happen to race on publicly owned land?</p><p></p><p>And what purpose will the permit serve? What are they trying to regulate? Usually, a permit serves to regulate the activity to prevent over-use and abuse.</p><p></p><p>Or are they wanting a share in the profits being made, much like royalties charged for producing oil or harvesting trees on public land? If that's the case, then they should require a permit only for those who intend to profit from the filming.</p><p></p><p>Well, just my humble, uneducated opinon on the matter.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EQuin, post: 58845, member: 111"] Alright, I can understand the pallet deal, but no photos or filming without a permit? That's ridiculous! Did they cite the specific regulation for the camera permit? It would look something like this - 8 C.F.R. 212, for instance (I just made the numbers up, but all federal regulations are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations - the first number is the Title of the Code, and the 2nd number after the acronym is the specific section or part under the title). I'm just interested in seeing what the actual regulation says, assuming it's already been promulgated by the BLM. If it's simply being proposed (i.e., not yet a formal regulation), then please let me know. I'd like to comment on it before it gets formally promulgated. When I go to a race with my daughter, I definitely intend to take pics to cherish the moments with her later on. I can understand charging a fee and requiring a hunter or a fisherman to apply for a permit, or a rancher to get one to graze cattle on public land, or a logging company to get one to harvest trees on public land. Those activities involve the actual use of public resources requiring compensation for their use and taking. But pictures? Come on. That's stretching it in my opinion. What public resources are being used up by taking pics or filming public land? And if they're mad about profits being made, they should realize that the pics and videos being sold focus more on the racers and their race vehicles than on the publicly-owned landscape. Why were they not so upset over the hundreds of calendars sold each year showing beautiful photos of federal parks like Yellowstone, Big Bend, etc.? They feel threatened by a fledgling industry of a few young race fans who want to sell videos of racers who happen to race on publicly owned land? And what purpose will the permit serve? What are they trying to regulate? Usually, a permit serves to regulate the activity to prevent over-use and abuse. Or are they wanting a share in the profits being made, much like royalties charged for producing oil or harvesting trees on public land? If that's the case, then they should require a permit only for those who intend to profit from the filming. Well, just my humble, uneducated opinon on the matter. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Off-Road Racing Community
Desert Racing
New BLM Rules
.
Top