How not to photograph Delicate Arch

Michael Fatali is one of the nation's premier large format landscape

photographers, but he appears to have gone too far in attempting to

create interesting lighting effects at Delicate Arch. The following

is an article from Salt Lake City's KSL-TV. Any comments?

<p>

Fires At Delicate Arch

<p>

It's become the symbol of Utah. Delicate Arch, one of the state's most

photographed and scenic wonders.

<p>

But now a prominent landscape photographer faces criminal charges for

starting four fires at Delicate Arch, and marring the landscape.

<p>

Authorities have released little information about the investigation.

But, Environment Specialist John Hollenhorst has learned exclusive

details.

<p>

We've been told the fires were set during a photo workshop or a class

at Delicate Arch. We haven't been able to get there to see the damage,

and we haven't been able to reach photographer Mike Fatali to hear his

story.

<p>

But he's accused of doing damage severe enough to be noticable in

photos of Utah's most famous arch.

<p>

Four years ago we went on a photography expedition with Mike Fatali.

He specializes in scrambling through Utah's rugged and spectacular

canyon country to take pictures.

<p>

He runs a photograophy school near Zion National Park. His photos sell

for high prices in his canyon-country photo shops.

<p>

On our expedtion four years ago, Fatali expressed strong love for the

landscape.

<p>

MIKE FATALI/LANSCAPE PHOTOGRAPHER/SEPT. 19, 1996: "I DO PHOTOGRAPHY AS

A WAY TO COMMUNICATE THE PLACES THAT I LOVE. IT'S REALLY NOT ABOUT THE

PHOTOGRAPHS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO ME. IT'S THE EXPERIENCES OF

EXPLORING AND BEING IN THIS ENVIRONMENT."

<p>

A month ago at Delicate Arch, Mike Fatali was allegedly leading a

photo workshop or class. On the slickrock and sand below the arch,

four fires were allegedly set.

<p>

It's not clear why, but one version of the story is that the fires

were intended to create a special lighting effect.

<p>

A tourist reported one fire still smouldering the next day.

<p>

Flammable fuel apparently seeped deep into the slickrock and left

three dark stains, which the Park Service has been unable to remove.

The largest, we're told, is roughly 3 feet by 6, and shows up in

photos of the arch.

<p>

We've been unable to reach Fatali for his side of the story. He's on a

photo expedition... presumably somewhere in the landscape he's built

his career on.

<p>

MIKE FATALI/LANSCAPE PHOTOGRAPHER/SEPT. 19, 1996: "THIS IS GOD'S

COUNTRY. IT DOESN'T GET BETTER THAN THIS."

<p>

In the next couple of weeks, a rock-restoration expert will hike to

the arch and assess the damages. After that, the U.S. Attorney intends

to file criminal charges.

<p>

A spokeswoman says the government has a responsibility to protect

resources and Delicate Arch is very near the top of the list of

resources that ought to be p

As I understand the situation, Mr Fatali has been suspended for one

year by Arizona HIways magazine and his photos removed from their

catalog and store due to this unfortunate situation. He was leading a

Friends of Arizona Hiways workshop at the time.

One point on which we can all agree: The arsonist (let's assume the

fire was intentional) should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of

applicable state and federal law. He/she has marred and perhaps

ruined one of a few special sites. If he/she is a photographer,

amateur or professional, then he/she has given all of us who travel

and make images a black eye.

Bob

In a follow-up story on KSL last night, it was revealed that Fatali

has apologized for causing the damage. Here is the story:

<p>

DEFACED ARCH

<p>

Black marks now mar one of the state's most photographed scenic

wonders. Now, for the first time, the photographer who faces criminal

charges for setting four fires beneath Delicate Arch tells his side of

the story.

<p>

It happened a month ago, and enraged the Park Rangers who overseee

Utah's most famous natural landmark. Environment Specialist John

Hollenhorst broke the story last week, and now has details.

<p>

As we suggested last week, the photographer says the fires were set to

illuminate Delicate Arch during a photography workshop. The

photographer is now apologizing for any damage that was done.

<p>

Delicate Arch is not only spectacularly beautiful and world-famous,

it's become the best-known symbol of the State of Utah. That's why

many people are shocked that veteran canyon-country photographer Mike

Fatali would have set fires just below the arch.

<p>

We still haven't been able to speak with him because he's in an

isolated location on a photo expedition. But he conveyed a message to

an associate, who sent it to us.

<p>

"There was never any attempt to cause damage," Fatali wrote. He went

to Delicate Arch to conduct an Arizona Highways photo workshop and he

says he had Park Service permission to shoot the arch at night.

<p>

"Small fires were lit to provide additional light," Fatali wrote. "As

a precaution, artificial logs were used and placed on aluminum pans."

<p>

The park service later told us a tourist discovered one fire still

smouldering the next day. Fuel from the fires seeped into slickrock,

leaving three dark stains below Delicate Arch that have resisted

cleanup efforts. The largest is three feet by six.

<p>

When he learned of the damage, Fatali says he contacted the Park

Service to share his concerns and apologies and offered to assist in

any way. Fatali wrote, "I have spent 20 years photographing the

Southwest, attempting to capture the glory of this land, to protect

it, never to destroy it."

<p>

Fatali and Park Rangers agree most tourists would likely not notice

the stains. But they do show up in photos. The Park Service and the

U.S. Attorney's Office are taking the case seriously and expect to

file criminal c

HE SHOULD BE PUT TO DEATH!!!!!!!!!!!! How can anyone, who supposedly

appreciates nature so much, could even consider doing such a thing??

I will now boycott his galleries and spread the same to anyone I can!!

I actually heard about this a while ago, as I was on a raft trip with

Tom Till when it happened. Tom briefly returned to town during the

trip, and heard about it through friends in the park service. Tom

lives in Moab, Utah, across the river from Arches.

<p>

What is not quoted in the paper, and something which *may or may not

be true*, but which Tom heard, is that one of the workshop

participants was quoted saying something to the effect of

<p>

"what's the big deal? We did this in all the other national parks

too!".

I am the wife of the previous Bruce Arnold and am completely sickened

by this story. We frequently travel down to this area and relish in

the beauty of the rocks. We have visited Fatali's Gallery on every

visit and have looked in awe at the skill he has demonstrated. I

feel duped and repulsed by ALL of his pictures. It is bad enough

that ANYONE would do such a thing, but a proclaimed lover of nature,

respectful of what has happened over centuries...makes me just plain

sick. How could he do such a thoughtless act? Does he not care that

perhaps I would like my grandchildren's grandchildren enjoy the

beauty of that area? And to mar with fire is just too much to take.

My husband is a hobby photographer and we have seen hundreds of awe

inspiring areas. Anyone who is anything CLOSE to a nature lover just

could not do such a thing. It saddens me greatly that someone could

do this. I really cannot even put into words the feeling in my gut.

Banning his photographs from all public display is not nearly enough

punishment. I'm not a violent person, but could go ditto on kill the

SOB!!!!!!

Gee, Cindy. I'm glad you found a fellow psycho like Bruce to travel

down life's highway with. It sounds like you deserve each other. I

just love it when you extremists come out of the woodwork and show

your true mentality. I think the best place for the two of you would

be up a tree somewhere. At least you couldn't harm anybody there.

Go back and get in your hole. Personally, I think they ought to put

a drill rig in that location [after they knock down that awful rock

outcrop] so I can have cheaper gas for my SUV!!!!!!!

With all due respect folks, I do not think that capital

punishment, official or unofficial, fits the crime. Lets keep things

in perspective shall we. He did not knock over the arch, spray paint

it black or some other such obvious heinous defacement. I fully agree

that was is alleged to have been done, is qualitatively just as bad as

far as most of us are concerned (myself included thank you), and that

a complete investigation and disciplinary action (if justified) is

certainly in order.

<p>

I just really hate to see such needless emotional outbursts that do

nothing but make this fine message forum a little bit more like usenet

from which I thought to have found sanctuary. If we are to discuss

this further, perhaps the subject of artifically manipulated vs pure

representational landscape photography would be a better route to go!

My surprise was as equally based in the bizarre idea Fatali was

working on, which does not seem to be in accord with his work that I

know.

I agree that it has become "emotional". But I guess I see it tied

together....if you have a passion for Nature Photography, you have to

have passion for what you are taking pictures of! And without a

passion for right and wrong, issues like these go by without

mention. And we send the message that it is ok...and it isn't.

Good reply Alec!!!

May the photography debate carry on....

No, Michael Fatali should not be put to death. But if you would like

you can lobby the Governor to bring back the death penalty by firing

squad as it was just phased out..(this is a joke, though the firing

squad death was legal here until just recently).

<p>

The negative press and the suspicion we will all be under now when

walking by with view cameras will follow us for a long time to come.

<p>

Stupid or not Michael was trying to get "the shot", and we all know

how that goes at times. Apparently he didn't think any fire scars

would result & seems to have tried to keep things under control by

using aluminum pans to contain his fires. (per the news accounts so

far) If he had used strobes gelled to match firelight no one would

have said a thing.

<p>

But... he didn't.

<p>

He set fires in a National Park and allegedly violated a host of

Federal laws in the process. He allegedly did this while leading an

Arizona Highways photo tour. What a publicity stunt?!?

<p>

All for "the shot".

<p>

Hope it was worth it personally & to his career. Now we will have to

walk even more carefully when carrying our view cameras as the anti-

access crowd will parade this one out more than the anti-pornography

crowd does Mapplethorpe. ONE incident and a black eye forever.

<p>

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

Since Fatali has been quoted in several accounts as admitting to

having set these fires using Duralogs and aluminum roaster pans. All

for the very dubious reason of photographing Delicate Arch at night

perhaps we should dispense with the debate about whether he did or

did not do something this stupid and distructive for his personal

gain or perhaps because as he has claimed " his love of the land".

<p>

The important thing it seems to me is to band together as

photographers who love this land and work to head off any forth

coming restrictive regulations that may come from the National Park

Service or BLM because of Mr. Fatalis total disregard for the rules

already in place or more importantly his total disregard for the

fragile land he has made a very nice living photographing.

<p>

Perhaps we should also urge the National Park Service to seek full

and complete sanctions against Fatali as required by law and make our

feelings known to the publisher of Arizona Hiways magazine as well.

After all they too have some responsibility being his employers at

the time of this incident as he was leading their photo workshop at

the time.

<p>

Comments?

Come on - this is a bizarre discussion. For all I know, the fire

stain was accidental. Fatali didn't intend to harm the arch! How

about the climbers who drill holes into the face of El Capitan -

shouldn't they be prosecuted instead?

Acidental or not the result is the same. Afterall he did intend to

set these fires in an area where fire if not totally forbidden

requires a special permit. This is the same defence the captian of

the Exxon Valdez should have used after creating the most disasterous

oil spill in history. As for the climbers on El Capitan what they are

doing is legal and they file the appropiate permits etc prior to

making their climb.

<p>

Finally, accident or not we are all responsible for our actions.When

you acidentially drive over the posted speed limit (speed) and the

officer gives you a ticket you also must pay your fine. The judge

doesn't care if you intended to speed or not, only, that you did and

guess what the result is the same with your insurance carrier they

don't say ah we won't raise your rates since it was really an

accident and you didn't realize how fast you were going.

<p>

The unintended result from Fatalis little accident may well be

onerous new restrictions on everyones ability to freely access and

photograph this beautiful wilderness of ours. No matter what his

ultimate penalty is we as photographers will also pay a price for his

actions.

I'm not condoning Fatali's stupid and over-zealous attempt to get just

the right light. However, this act pales in comparison to the rest of

the crap going on in Arches, Canyonlands, Zion, Bryce and other

national parks and scenic sites in the area.

<p>

Every single time I've been to Arches NP to photograph any of the more

well known spots the place has been literally crawling with

fat-butted tourists in their motorhomes and minivans. The steady

stream of huffing and puffing, gasping walkers on the trail to

Delicate Arch is enough of a downer; half way there you feel like

packing it in and turning back. And the crowds of people sitting

around the base of the arch around sunset, teenagers crawling all over

the rocks, parents screaming at their children, spoiling all the sight

lines.....well, it's enough to make you sick.

<p>

And it seems that every stretch of river in that area, with even the

slightest hint of "fast water", has been completely taken over by

these opportunistic rafting businesses, with their lumbering

school buses clogging the roads, their ugly yellow or orange

inflatable boats, teeming with howling, drunken idiots. I used to

fish these waters years ago; now it's a foregone conclusion that any

cast is likely to snag one of these rafts.

<p>

And how about the crazed Jeep crowd that gets together every Easter in

Moab, racing their 4WDs up and down the main drag, with beer-guzzling

assholes hanging off the damned things. Can the town of Moab possibly

get any tackier? Just go into any part of Canyonlands NP and these

nimrods are everywhere, too busy trying to figure out some new way of

rolling these things over to worry much about the scenery, stained by

Fatali's fires or not. And let's not forget the mountain bike folks,

either.

<p>

Why don't we just kill all of them? It seems to me that the place

was ruined long ago. Maybe we photographers are to blame...we took

too many beautiful photographs and attracted all these idiots.

One point that has been missed so far in this discussion is that

as deplorable as Fatali's actions were, the worse part is that he was

"teaching" a group of photographers the same lack of respect for

nature that he probably has been practicing most of his life.

<p>

I can't imagine being part of his workshop and witnessing this event.

The fact that no one in the group took any action to stop Fatali says

something about the breed of "new" photographers that are going to go

after the "perfect" photograph with no regard to their impact on the

landscape.

<p>

I believe that the entire group should be punished to the maximum

extent allowed by law. Notice I backed-off my death penalty stance

from yesterday. Now that I have "cooled off", I can think rationally!

However, I still can't comprehend Fatali's actions!!

<p>

I encourage everyone to e-mail Arizona Highways, The National Park

Service, and Fatali Galleries at the following e-mail addresses to

voice your concerns with Fatali's actions. Thanks!

<p>

Fatali Gallery: fatali@fatali.com

<p>

Arizona Highways: photodirector@arizonahighways.com

<p>

National Park Service: archinfo@nps.gov

I have never heard of Arizona Highway photography workshops. Are these

serious photography workshops or the kind intended to bilk a few

hundred bucks from novices to give them the honor of being taught to

operate their new Nikons by some professional? My guess is the latter

which would explain some of this. I don't want to jump to any

conclusions of course ;-)

Two years ago, I took a photo class at a local community college so I

could get some outside feedback about my images. During one critique

session, I was floored when the instructor praised an image then went

on to explain how it would have been greatly improved if I simplified

the composition by pulling out a few of the flowers that were messing

up the background.

<p>

I explained that so far as I am concerned, Nature is what it is and I

take pictures of what I see, not what I'd like to see. While I don't

have any problem with picking up garbage or removing leaves that will

blow away in few minutes anyway, I wouldn't dream of cutting branches

off a tree, moving rocks or pulling flowers out of the ground.

<p>

Needless to say, he disagreed with me and proceeded to show the class

all of the "gardening" tools he carries in his camera bag so he won't

ever find himself stuck photographing Nature looking anything but its

groomed and manicured best.

<p>

To my surprise, with only one exception, everyone in the class agreed

with him! I was stunned, at least until I realized that at 39, I was

at least a decade older than everybody else in the room. Clearly, my

formative years as a nature photographer occurred in a different time

and frame of mind than theirs and it showed ... for them, photography

appears to be a competitive endeavor whereas for me, it's an artistic

one.

<p>

If Nature shuts me out today, then I'll just try again tomorrow ... I

have no need or desire to improve my results by altering my subjects,

as Michael Fatali and other professional photographers sometimes feel

pressured to do. And on those rare occasions when I do manage to get

a truly spectacular image on film (about every other year or two!), I

will enjoy it, humble and unpublished though it may be, all that much

more as a result.

First of all, fires are not even allowed in Arches NP, so the act was

wrong...period.<br><br>

Climbers do not (and have not been allowed for quite some time to)

drill holes in the face of El Capitan. All climbing in national

parks is limited to permanent routes (i.e. using existing protection)

or with temporary (or no) aid where designated. This method of

managing routes and monitoring climbing makes the activity safer and

promotes responsible ways to enjoy parks.<br><br>

Mr. Fatali's actions did neither.

Drilling is actually legal in Yosemite, provided it is done

by hand. Frivolous bolting has always been frowned upon in the

climbing community.

Bolts are essential for climber's safety and being impossible

to spot from a distance, are a neglectible distraction.

I don't see what all the hubbub is about. Some turpentine and gray

paint will have the rock looking like new in no time. Did you know

that Algore was the first to photograph Delicate Arch.

<p>

Willie

Well, I'm really glad I took photographs while I was at Delicate Arch!

<p>

Yes, there will be more restrictions, because this incident shows

that the more people who have access to wilderness, the more likely

it is that someone will cause harm, if only through a momentary lapse

of common sense or judgement as seems to be the case with Mr. Fatali.

<p>

Let a million photographers in over 10 centuries, all with the best

of intentions not to harm the land they love, and there WILL be

permanent damage done. Its a statistical near certainty.

<p>

Of course, by then the several billion regular tourists would have

reduced these spots to fine dust !

<p>

Wilderness is forever only if you keep yourself off of it forever.

<p>

The only sensible idea I've heard for long term preservation was a

lottery system for access.

I think some of you are missing the point!! Allow me to disect the

last posting.

<p>

1. There may or may not be more restrictions at Arches National Park.

Only time will tell. If there are more restrictions, it will not be

because more people have access to wilderness. Arches National Park

is NOT wilderness!! It is only a 5 mile roundtrip hike to Delicate

Arch; not wilderness by any stretch of the imagination! If there are

more restrictions, it will be a result of Fatali's actions and other

people like him that have NO respect for the land!

<p>

2. Can YOU actually categorize Fatali's actions as a momentary lapse

of common sense or judgement?? Are you one of the "new" breed of

photographers that witnessed the event during the workshop?? I hope

you realize that setting 4 fires would take some time and effort!!

<p>

3. The terrain in Arches National Park can be preserved if people

treat it with respect; i.e. stay on trails or on bare rock. Yes, a

little bit of erosion will occur with all the little feet tramping on

the rock, but it will pale in comparison to nature's erosional forces

that are acting on the same rock every day! Treating the landscape

with respect prohibits scaring the rocks by fire!!!!