December 3, 2014

Mary Wagner
Associate Chief, U.S. Forest Service
Commercial Filming in Wilderness
Attn: Wilderness & Wild and Scenic Rivers
201 14th St. SW, Mailstop Code: 1124
Washington, DC 20250-1124
Via email: [email protected]
Re: Commercial Filming in Wilderness
Dear Ms. Wagner:
Outdoor Alliance is a coalition of five national, member-based organizations
representing the human powered outdoor recreation community. The coalition includes
Access Fund, American Canoe Association, American Whitewater, International
Mountain Bicycling Association, and Winter Wildlands Alliance and represents the
interests of the millions of Americans who climb, paddle, mountain bike, and
backcountry ski and snowshoe on our nations public lands, waters, and snowscapes.
Our members share a deep concern with preserving the Wilderness characteristics of
designated landscapes; many also engage in activities that would potentially be affected
by the Forest Services Proposed Directive for Commercial Filming in Wilderness.
Outdoor Alliance commends the Forest Service for taking steps to ensure consistent
standards for the evaluation of permit applications for Wilderness filming. We
understand that the Forest Service faces a difficult task in implementing mandates from
the Wilderness Act and the Act of May 26, 2000, (16 U.S.C. 460l-6d) that may limit the
agencys discretion in allowing, without a permit, certain small-scale commercial filming
practices that are nevertheless likely to have little if any effect on the Wilderness
landscape or the experience of other Forest users. These mandates, in some cases,
reflect an outdated conception of both the technology involved in the capture of images
as well as the opportunities that exist for small-scale, but arguably commercial,
dissemination of those images. As explained below, we hope that the Forest Service will
use the opportunity of integration of this directive to look for ways to reduce the
administrative burden for small-scale filmers as well as for the agency itself.




Commercial Filming
With advances in technology for the capture of still and moving images, the ability to
create commercial-quality imagery is now in significantly more peoples hands than it
was even 15 years ago. Cameras capable of creating very high quality still and moving
images are cheaper and smaller than ever before. DSLR cameras are able to shoot
amazingly high-quality video, to say nothing of small, user-worn video cameras like
GoPros (which also can be used to capture still images). High frame rate video cameras
shoot a series of images, each of which is of high enough quality to function as a still
image on its own. Conversely, enthusiasts with DSLRs often shoot a series of still
images that are later combined to create time-lapse videos. These technological
improvements blur, if not obliterate, the distinction between still and moving images
while reducing the impact on the landscape likely in the capture of either.
Of even greater significance than changes in the technology for image capture are
changes in the landscape for dissemination and, in some cases, monetization of those
images. Today, an outdoor recreationist or adventure sports athlete might shoot a short
video and post it to a blog containing advertising or through social media channels like
Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram, potentially tagging sponsors who provide him or her
with equipment or a small income. Athletes engaged in this type of activity are often
incredibly prolific, posting videos as often as daily and creating no greater impact to the
landscape than another user who chooses not to engage in filming.
Most, if not all, of these films carry a message about the use and enjoyment of
wilderness in that they show fun, healthy opportunities for outdoor recreation in a
pristine landscape. They help generate enthusiasm about outdoor recreation, the way in
which most Americans experience their public lands and a key way in which participants
come to appreciate the outdoors and develop a conservation and stewardship ethic.
They are also likely to advertise [a] product or service, however, in that they may
include a sponsors logo or showcase the use of a sponsors product.
All of this is to say that what commercial filming looks like as an activity occurring on
the landscape is, today, often vastly different than the large-footprint productions familiar
to the drafters of the Wilderness Act or even the Act of May 26, 2000 of May 26, 2000.
Taking account of these changes, the Forest Service should ensure that the focal point
for any filming restrictions is the impacts of the activity on the landscape and the
experience of other users. In order to accomplish this, the agency must modernize its
conceptions of both filming and what constitutes commercial use while still staying
within the bounds of what is allowable under the Wilderness Act.




Filming Directive
The Forest Service undeniably faces a difficult task in squaring the requirements of the
Wilderness Act and the Act of May 26, 2000, with the current media landscape. We are
extremely pleased to see Chief Tidwells statement in his November 4 memorandum
that:
Commercial film and photography permit fees should be primarily viewed
as land-use fees. If the activity presents no more impact on the land than
that of the general public, then it shall be exempt from permit
requirements.
We wholeheartedly agree that the only sound basis for leveling permitting requirements
and fees is the effect of the activity on the landscape or on the experience of other
Forest users. We believe, however, that the directive, and possibly Forest Service
regulations, requires revision in order to ensure that, in keeping with Chief Tidwells
intent, Forest impacts are the touchstone for permitting requirements and not a
somewhat arbitrary commercial/noncommercial distinction.
In particular, we believe that the Forest Service should address several elements under
45.1c - Evaluation of Proposals:
First, regarding 5(a), the word recreational should be added to the list of acceptable
primary objectives, so that the revised criteria would read a. Has a primary objective of
dissemination of information about the use and enjoyment of wilderness or its
ecological, geological, recreational or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or
historical value (16 U.S.C. 1131(a) and (b)). While recreation is encompassed by the
term enjoyment, adding the word recreation clarifies the section with regard to an
important Wilderness value.
Second, the criteria in 5(c) should be rewritten to provide better clarity and allowance for
wilderness filming where no suitable alternative locations exist outside Wilderness, or
when the best location is inside Wilderness. For example, an outfitter or guide operating
exclusively in Wilderness may wish to film clients participating guided activities and
would not reasonably be able to film at an alternative location. Similarly, a filmmaker
wishing to create a film about paddling a particular river or climbing a certain peakand
not just paddling or climbing generallymay not pass the criteria as currently written.
Third, the criteria requiring that a permitted film Would not advertise any product or
service (5(g)), must be materially revised. While a blanket prohibition may be effective
in ensuring that large-scale commercial shoots (e.g., a television commercial), do not
occur in Wilderness areas, as 5(g) is currently worded, it is overly broad and has the
potential to not only unduly affect small-scale film production, but also the various ways




these small scale productions directly benefit specific Wilderness areas and Wilderness
as a concept.
As discussed above, the media production landscape has undergone significant
changes in recent years. A film aimed at celebrating Wilderness uses and values or
delivering an educational message is far more likely to be produced with the financial
backing of a business in the outdoor industryand include some incidental advertising
for that business, for example through display of the businesss logos or use of the
companys productsthan to be created through private financing with costs to be
recouped through ticket or video sales. This business model has the effect of
democratizing media production and makes possible myriad creative and positive films
that would not be financially viable without some advertising component.
In light of the current and evolving media landscape, and to ensure that these valuable
filmswhich help to advance the cause of Wilderness, stewardship, and conservation,
as well as appreciation for outdoor recreation and the outdoorscan continue to be
made, the blanket prohibition on advertising products or services should either be struck
from the directive, or the 5(g) criteria should be clarified to state that advertisements are
not prohibited where they do not constitute the primary message of the media piece.1
*

Outdoor Alliance has tried to restrict our comments here to the scope of the proposed
directive for evaluating permit applications for commercial filming in Wilderness. It is
clear that this proposal has drawn significant attention to ancillary issues relating to
when permits are required to engage in filming activities, and we are encouraged that
the Forest Service has already recognized this overwhelming level of interest as a
signal that it may be appropriate to revisit related regulations in light of many of the
changes to the media landscape discussed above. We appreciate the opportunity to
comment on the integration of the proposed directive and look forward to working with

Additionally, the 5(g) prohibition, as currently worded, would potentially prohibit a permitted
Wilderness guide service from filming an advertisement for the services it is legally licensed to
provide.




the Forest Service to ensure a robust media landscape that retains strong protections
for Wilderness.

Best regards,

Adam Cramer
Executive Director
Outdoor Alliance

cc:

Brady Robinson, Executive Director, Access Fund

Wade Blackwood, Executive Director, American Canoe Association
Mark Singleton, Executive Director, American Whitewater
Mike Van Abel, Executive Director, International Mountain Bicycling Association
Mark Menlove, Executive Director, Winter Wildlands Alliance
Lee Davis, Executive Director, The Mazamas
Martinique Grigg, Executive Director, The Mountaineers