jdrose Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 I have heard rumors that no photography is allowed on the Skywalk!? Is that so? If so, why would the tribe make that rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobertChura Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 So they can make money from people when they show up or to sell their own. I heard it cost 25 bucks to walk it. I am too cheap for that thrill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelging Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 Yes,no cameras are allowed on the skywalk itself, Not even cell phone cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eajames Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 I'm not sure why the rule was enacted. You can learn more in this thread at the largeformatphotography.info forum. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php? t=24288&highlight=skywalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
14mm 2.8l Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 I'll scratch that visit off my to do list. I would have never guessed no cameras are allowed. In my newspaper it implied the fees and extra fees were above $25 per person. $50 plus for the wife is steep especially when compared to the annual cost of our national parks pass. Lindy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
14mm 2.8l Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 I see now, the added fee is the entrance fee of $50 per car plus $25 per person. $100. for a 15 minute visit without cameras is beyond steep. <p> http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=24288 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two23 Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 If enough phtographers refuse to pay the money because we can' take photos, the policy might change. Especially if "comments" are sent to the park service. We need to be proactive on this stuff. They already mortally crippled the ability to take photos in Yellowstone in winter by dramatically reducing our transportation (snowmobile.) Kent in SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelging Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 Kent, The skywalk is not in GC National Park, its on a Indian Reservation, the park service has nothing to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 yeah itsa terrible thing: experiencing the world without a camera ( I've read that the stated reason is to try to keep scratching of the phenomenally expensive plexiglass to a minimum, but I'll also bet its to minimize annoying the fellow guests. One photographer is one thing , but a hundred or more per day is another. ) Also not being able to add more noise and air pollution to one of the truly wonderful places in the world (Yellowstone N.P.) just breaks this conservative's hard heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 Not only $50 to park your car, but an extra $25 per person to go on the skywalk and a $500 "fine" if they catch you out there with a camera! Give me a break. Personally I wouldn't go near it, but I presume they'll drag in enough tourons to eventually make it pay. I hear they're planning a golf course on the property too. If there isn't a casino there, can one be far behind? It's their land, they can do what they want with it (within some sort of reason I guess), but I certainly won't be paying them a visit. The Yellowstone ban on snowmobiles is a totally different matter. At least the skywalk doesn't cause noise and air pollution and is unlikely to disturb the wildlife during hard times. I presume there's probably a ban on using jet skis on Yellowstone Lake too and I can't say I'd be bothered by that one either. If they ever ban cameras (or start adding a charge for their use), THEN you can sign me up as a protester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
14mm 2.8l Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 My sister in law and husband just came back from Las Vegas. They toured the length of the grand canyon in a helicopter for $125 a piece. Now their chopper ride is on my to do list as it far better value when compared to this silly excursion. Back to skywalk, when it opened my regional newpaper did a front 1/2 page color spread on it. In it they never once mentioned the $50 car fee but alluded to other fees above $25 a person. I'll guess the free tv coverage Buzz Aldrin got for his first skywalk during its opening fills their parking lot... with many annoyed visitors who are to be fined for shooting pics. Their property, their amusement ride, their rules I agree. But the ridiculous additional fees should have been included in all the free press coverage they got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_proud Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 This view is free, after gas, meals and other miscellaneous costs to get there. Maybe not the same as standing on plexiglass looking straight down, but still a rush for me anyway. www.billproudphotography.com<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two23 Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 I read but forgot the skywalk was on private (reservation) land. Still, I won't go see it. If enough refuse, the policy will change. For that kind of money I'd rather do an air trip anyway. I'm not a snowmobile guy but living in the North I know something about them. The latest 4-cycle machines are very quiet and very clean. Those should be allowed. I've been to YS in winter a number of times and the number of people we are talking about is very, very small. Overall, less than 5% of of park visitors are there in the winter season. The pollution/noise deal was WAY overhyped by overzealous environmentalists, mostly from distant urban areas. With the newest techno advances, even those hyped up claims are now moot. Sometimes conservationists/environmentalists are beneficial friends to photographers, sometimes they are very clearly our worst enemy. YS is a very CLEAR example of how the most fanatical environmentalists are the latter. Watch them closely and oppose them when they try to shut down photography by the public. Kent in SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucecyr Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 No cameras means faster throughput, better views, more money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 "With the newest techno advances, even those hyped up claims are now moot. Sometimes conservationists/environmentalists are beneficial friends to photographers, sometimes they are very clearly our worst enemy." Kent, Excellent points and well stated, however doesn't that assume that all snowmobile users will be using the newest machines? Or should the National Park Service check that all snowmobiles that are being used in the park meet that standard? And if that is the case, what should be done with people that are found in violation of that standard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdrose Posted April 29, 2007 Author Share Posted April 29, 2007 National Park Service has nothing to do with it. The Skywalk is NOT on public land it is on private, tribal land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdrose Posted April 29, 2007 Author Share Posted April 29, 2007 If they are interested in turnover why don't they just ban tripods? I think it is absolutely insane that you cannot take a photograph. Insane. Maybe they are afraid that the soul of the canyon is going to be lost or something silly like that. Lot's of other places to see...crossed this one off my list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_chappell Posted April 29, 2007 Share Posted April 29, 2007 <I>....overzealous environmentalists, mostly from distant urban areas.</i><P> Gosh. I was under the impression that Yellowstone was a <B>National</b> park, in which case where one lives has zero relevance to one's right to express an opinion about park usage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnclinch Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I have friends who ski back country alot. They find snowmobiles very intrusive. Should photographers be allowed four stroke quad bikes in the summer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_levine Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I won't go anywhere without my snowmobile and my camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nancy s. Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I will be at the GC in about 48 hours.. No sky walk for me. Too much $$, no cameras and (most important) I don't do heights. My third visit to the area and to the GC.. I think I can find enough fodder for photos between the full moon on May 2nd (staying at GC Village) and sun rise and sunset... I don't need no steenkeen' sky walk.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david jeffery Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 There was a study done apparently which found that most people visiting the Grand Canyon only spend 15 minutes on average viewing the canyon, and yet spend an average of half an hour in the concessions. One woman told me that she had visited the surrounding area previously and I asked her if she had seen the Grand Canyon. She said she didn't remember because she wasn't paying attention. I can't describe my reaction to that statement as there were so many happening at once. The no camera rule is a good business idea. Photographers actually stop and look at things! and spend far too much time at places. Bad idea! especially when it's importatnt to keep things moving $$$$. Possibly if enough photographers were to shoot pictures of the one single spot around the walkway people might be less likely to visit. Better Idea. The bus pulls up at one end of the walkway and people pay $$$ to put on fluffy slippers (ideally fluffy like a cuddly little animal). They walk a short distance around the walkway over the canyon and quickly get back on the bus conveiniently waiting at the other end, and then get whisked off to buy ice cream and a tee-shirt that says "Save the Canyon" or "I survived the 4000 ft Suspension!" They can claim to be more adventurous than the people that just view the canyon from the side, which will soon be "officially" lame in comparison. They can walk less, feel more daring, and eat ice cream sooner. A certain number of them may not remember if they have already done this already or not and may pay again! Photographers might just get in the way of a good business plan in this case. It's good that we have been banned from there from the get go since we do just tend to just stand around and look at things. Cattle boats, cattle buses, cattle tours, cattle canyon skywalks - hey many people must enjoy it and that's OK! As seniors gain a higher percentage of the population with the baby boomer aging, business may just get better and better. I like Bill Proud's idea above. To add to it let's all chip in to get a boom truck out to Toroweap to dangle us over the edge there. Since the boom truck is my idea I'll take the sunrise and sunset time slots! We could also chip in to have someone shoot pictures at the skywalk and then just pay the fine! Have Fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_anthes Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 David, great ideas! Myself, I'll order the "I Survived the 4,000-foot Suspension" tee shirt on the Internet and won't even have to travel to Arizona, where there are too many cacti and scorpions and not enough rain anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morganlashley Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 It's a consequence of granting an unconstitutional monopoly....tribal gambling, excuse me gaming, and other forms of this is truly an American travesty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eajames Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Native peoples can do whatever they choose with their land. This thing might be a stark- raving stupid idea, but I wouldn?t characterize it as "American travesty". I can think of a few though. 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