Legal restrictions on photos taken on federal land?

<p>This past weekend I spent some time at a decommissioned fort in my area. The fort is part of a "National Recreation Area." </p>

<p>While I was taking photos of an old, shuttered (and probably condemned) building, a US Park Ranger drove up and asked me: "Are you here on your own or are you shooting for a company?" I assured him that I was here on my own (true). He warned me that there's a "big fine" for taking commercial photos of "federal buildings." (The government probably doesn't have much use for this decaying structure anymore, but the ranger made it sound as though I was illegally photographing the Pentagon.)</p>

<p>So, now I have some questions.<br>

- If you take a photo on Federal property, can you publish the photo or sell is as a stock photo or as a fine art print? Would you need to get permission from the National Park Service to do so? For example, if you take a photo of the Grand Canyon are you required to gain permission in order to publish the photo?<br>

- What if the photo contains a building, e.g. one of the Grand Canyon lodges, an old fort, an Alcatraz prison building, or ancient ruins? Would this image of a so-called "federal building" be something that a photographer cannot market without government approval?</p>

<p>I'm not a lawyer but I don't think your park ranger knew what he was talking about. If you search on the National Park Service web site you'll find a document that explains how a permit is required for commercial photography, but "commercial" is defined as photo shoots involving models, lots of lighting gear, bringing in truckloads of equipment, etc., rather than the use of the photos. Otherwise, it says that photographers can basically go and do whatever other park visitors are allowed to do. Whether a national recreation area comes under the jurisdiction of the Parks Service I don't know without looking up. I work in Washington and there are several photographers who make a living selling prints of various exteriors of all the famous federal buildings from the Capitol to the White House to the Lincoln Memorial etc. and to my knowledge no permit is necessary. But that said there can be many restrictions -- tripod permits are needed in certain areas. Interiors of many buildings are restricted, etc.</p>

I guess the ranger was confused about the meaning of the word public and who his employers actually are.

<p>I've had the same thing happen at Tennessee Valley in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area -- and the building was a barn!</p>

<p>So far as I know, the only restrictions you could likely face involve security installations, personnel, etc. Driving up to a military installation and trying to take a picture of the gate and gate guards will get you a response from armed guys with an attitude.<br>

Taking a photo of buildings (so long as it doesn't involve a security breach) shouldn't be an issue. I used to be stationed on The Presidio, and a lot of it was very photogenic.<br>

I concur that the ranger seemed to be incorrect, but his approach may have been about something else.<br>

Craig, GGNRA and other rec areas belong to the Dept. of the Interior, most of it in trust for the military (unlikely ever to revert to military use though). Some of the facilities at GGNRA belong to Homeland Security, Dept. of the Army, etc. Complicated arrangement.</p>

<p>I think the ranger is confused about the laws but knows exactly who his employers are. And who owns the property. It's not the random feckless taxpayer. There is no ownership interest in federal or other "public" property that gives an individual any ownership rights simply because one is a taxpayer. Federal land covers a multitude of potential owner agencies. For NPS areas:</p>

<p>http://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/DOrder53.html</p>

<p>I believe there was an attempt to unify the permit process a while back but don't know how that went. There's unlikely to be any "security" issue unless you somehow find yourself in a restricted area and that's not usually something that happens unintentionally. Signs, barbed wire, etc.</p>

<p>I found this information on the National Park Service website. I think I'll print a few copies and keep them in my camera bag in case I run into some zealous rangers.</p>

<p>http://home.nps.gov/applications/digest/permits.cfm?urlarea=permits</p>

<p>

<p>The National Park Service permits commercial filming and still photography when it is consistent with the park’s mission and will not harm the resource or interfere with the visitor experience.</p>

<p><strong>When is a permit needed?</strong><br>

All commercial filming activities taking place within a unit of the National Park system require a permit. Commercial filming includes capturing a moving image on film and video as well as sound recordings.<br>

<b>Still photographers require a permit when</b><br>

1. the activity takes place at location(s) where or when members of the public are generally not allowed; or<br>

2. the activity uses model(s), sets(s), or prop(s) that are not a part of the location’s natural or cultural resources or administrative facilities; or<br>

3. Park would incur additional administrative costs to monitor the activity.</p>

 

</p>

<p>Even without reading the above, I thought you were treated fairly. It is government property and they have a right to contol it.</p>

<p>The security guy has a responsibility to see the rules are followed and it seems he did politely. Obviosly they don`t care if you do a snap for the camera club or photo albumn.</p>

<p>Uncle does not want rangers deciding what might or might not be a security risk, so his criteria commercial or non commercial usage.</p>

<p>Somebody please show this feckless taxpayer the federal law that says you can't take photos, commercial or otherwise, of a federal building from a public area. Extra credit for telling me what the "big fine" would be, under federal sentencing guidelines.</p>

<p>By the way, since this is a federal government agency, all the big talk you usually hear in photographer's rights forums about First Amendment rights and Prior Restraint actually does apply.</p>

<p>When you're done researching those two questions, riddle me this: I understand commercial use of a photo, but how, exactly, does one take a commercial photo?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>By definition in the U.S., government or federal property is owned by the taxpayers and citizens of the country.</p>

<p>Anything restricting any individual's use of it has to be justified as "for the greater good" in some way.</p>

<p>A park ranger is a custodian charged with protecting the public's property from harm, among other things.</p>

<p>Licensing and fees for commercial work (think a movie set or a modelling shoot with a crew, lights, etc.) is to prevent that work from intruding upon other people's enjoyment of the publics' property, not to "turn a profit" for the government.</p>

<p>A restriction on, say, using tripods in a particular area would likely be for safety concerns, that others using the public facility might trip over them or their view might be blocked.</p>

<p>A restriction on photographing a secure facility is also arguably for the greater good, when that outweighs individual rights.</p>

<p>I think the ranger in the example given was just blowing smoke. He probably was tasked with keeping people from entering and exploring older buildings that might be hazardous and preventing graffiti or vandalism, and got bored so decided to chat with the OP.</p>

<p>Parts of some closed military bases are off limits for a variety of reasons that mostly have to do with safety. That might be lead or unexploded ordinance on firing ranges or anything else that's deemed as potentially hazardous.</p>

<p>There are no limitations on commercial usage of an image made of federal property, subject to security restrictions.</p>

<p>I've shot on Alcatraz, personally, and the rangers, docents and volunteers there are truly great to work with and couldn't be more helpful. A big part of their job is to ensure the safety and enjoyment of the crowds of thousands who visit nearly every day, so that would have a bearing on what you can and can't do there are a photographer. </p>

<p>There are some areas of Alcatraz not open to the public seasonally, due to nesting birds and other environmental factors. Other areas are closed due to safety concerns. For example, the "basement" of the prison is actually the remains of the first floor of the Civil War era fort that was there before the prison was built. It's off limits to the general public due to a lot of low ceilings, overhead pipes and many other risky areas, but sure is interesting to wander around and explore given the chance! (If interested, see http://www.friendsofcivilwaralcatraz.org/ and/or my galleries at www.printroom.com/pro/amfoto1)</p>

<p>You should have told the ranger that you'll gladly comply if he forfeits his publicly-funded salary. He was way off base.</p>

<p>They should send that park ranger back to orientation classes. It's either ignorance of the agency's policies or federal laws or worse, "power tripping in his own kingdom."</p>