I may be missing something but this sounds like big money wants to make it free for commercial shoots in our public lands. Sounds like they want to remove restrictions put in place to protect the land and the public’s enjoyment of these lands.
Looks like the bill is disguised as freedom of speech.
To my knowledge it is already legal and free for nonprofessionals to photograph our national parks, etc.
Big money, big 18 wheeler production, photo tours or any other professional, for profit company needs to pay to use our lands and these companies need to be restricted as to what they can and cannot do to our lands.
No free ride for big money. No unrestricted professional use of our public lands.
Please clue me in if I am missing something.
Posted by David Chauvin on January 6, 2015 at 2:48 PM
This is from the same guy proposing turning the permitting of energy resource "exploration" on federal lands over to the states. All under the cute moniker of "Federal Land Freedom Act ".
Unregulated commercial use of federal land is a recipe for disaster. Using the name of one of the most noted nature photographers of our times just adds to the insult.
Discussion
2 repliesMax
Looks like the bill is disguised as freedom of speech.
To my knowledge it is already legal and free for nonprofessionals to photograph our national parks, etc.
Big money, big 18 wheeler production, photo tours or any other professional, for profit company needs to pay to use our lands and these companies need to be restricted as to what they can and cannot do to our lands.
No free ride for big money. No unrestricted professional use of our public lands.
Please clue me in if I am missing something.
http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Steve_Stockman_Energy_+_Oil.htm
Unregulated commercial use of federal land is a recipe for disaster. Using the name of one of the most noted nature photographers of our times just adds to the insult.