stewart_ethier1 Posted October 22, 2000 Share Posted October 22, 2000 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdmcglasson Posted October 22, 2000 Share Posted October 22, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_moulton1 Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewart_ethier1 Posted October 23, 2000 Author Share Posted October 23, 2000 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_arnold3 Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 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!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lloyd_chambers Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 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!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_arnold3 Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 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!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alec1 Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 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!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_ross Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_arnold3 Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_goldfarb Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 Never was a "flame war" more aptly named. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_arnold3 Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 Good reply Alec!!! May the photography debate carry on.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_smith Posted October 23, 2000 Share Posted October 23, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdmcglasson Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreas_carl Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdmcglasson Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sergio_ortega Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_arnold3 Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_ross Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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 ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audidudi Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chad_jarvis1 Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qtluong Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 Drilling is actually legal in Yosemite, provided it is done by hand. Frivolous bolting has always been frowned upon in theclimbing community. Bolts are essential for climber's safety and being impossibleto spot from a distance, are a neglectible distraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willie_jefferson_clinton Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msitaraman Posted October 24, 2000 Share Posted October 24, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_arnold3 Posted October 25, 2000 Share Posted October 25, 2000 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!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now