NPS Changes at Katmai National Park, Brooks River

Hey Folks,

This note may well be too late but I think it's worth posting regardless. And if anyone has any thoughts, comment period for the Compendium ended Feb 15, but afaik, the final rule isn't yet published.

This was the proposed new Compendium rule put out earlier this year to apply to photographing at Brooks Falls.

13.1242 Brooks Camp developed Area (BCDA): closures and restrictions
The deployment and use of tripods and rail mounted fixtures on the Brooks Falls Platform is prohibited. Monopods are allowed. Tripods may be used in monopod configuration if the legs are fully collapsed to the center position and the unit is not self-supporting. Affixing any camera mounting system to walkways, railing or other infrastructure in the restricted area is prohibited.

The reason for this restrictions is as follows:

Due to increased visitation, the wait times and demand for viewing sales on the elevated walkways and platforms at Brook's [sic] Camp has increased. The Brooks Fall platform is especially in demand a it overlooks the falls and affords outstanding opportunities to watch bears fishing and interacting with other bears.
It is the responsibility of the park, to the extent possible, to ensure equitable allocation and use of facilities.
it has been determined through years of direct observation that camera tripods take up excessive amounts of space in the already crowded prime viewing areas. Additionally, the use of tripods allows a photographer to effectively block off space while they move around, remotely trigger the cameras or are otherwise occupied.
Rail-mounted cameras also prevent the free movement of visitors around the prime viewing areas and have led to conflicting the past between photographers and other visitors who accidentally jar the mounted cameras by leaning against the rails.
Monopods will still allow photographers to steady the camera, but require them to be "hands on" at all times, are very mobile and do not take up or block off the excessive spaced that tripods do.

The reason less restrictive methods will not be effective are as follows:

The current policy of allowing tripods and railed mounted fixtures has proven untenable. There have been increasing conflicts between wildlife viewers and photographers.
This continuing conflict is the number one complaint from visitors filling out the visitor comment forms at Brooks Camp. Park employees spend a lot of time mitigating issues between photographers and wildlife viewers.
Allowing tripods to take up 2 to 3 times the space of a single person a crowded viewing area is not an equitable allocation and use of facilities. Similarly restricting the free movement of the public in a crowded viewing area by allowing fixed, rail-mounted cameras has proved problematic.

I have a few issues with this the least of which is the rather absurd lack of any date-based rule. Katmai Service Providers (authorized commercial operators inside the park) met with the new Superintendent Mark Sturm recently and discussed this. But most of those folks are NOT wildlife photographers, so they don't really care (fishing guides mostly). There is absolutely no reason this rule is not limited to the busiest times of use. 

I also think it's more than a little bit ridiculous that the platform is now 20 years old and this is now a problem. Overall use at Brooks right change but the number of visitors allowed on the platform at any given time hasn't changed in years AFAIK. If this is a problem, I'd ask "why now?" and I'd also suggest maybe a better solution is to have fewer people on the platform at any one time.

Lastly, I'd demand to see the data on the "number one complaint" notice.

The public comment period for the year is over, but they also have't made any final decision yet either. So I think it's well worth sending in a comment to Katmai NP.

The superintendent's email is mark_sturm@nps.gov and his assistant Casey is at casey_hagman@nps.gov or 907-246-2124.

Cheers
Carl

A quick update.

Mark emailed me today and said

"we did adjust the proposed rule to be in effect from June 15 to August 15 (if I have the dates right) The final rule should be out soon."

That's a big step forward but I think it's still a pretty egregious and generally needless change.

I doubt they heard from many more people than a few guides in Alaska on this.

Cheers
Carl

I understand your concern, but photographers everywhere can be abusive and possessive of locations. At Bosque del Apache, I was quizzed by management several years ago about the use of tripods at the Flight Deck. They were getting many complaints concerning abusive photographers hogging the deck and asking others to move over, quit shaking the deck by walking, etc. They were seeking input to decide how to deal with the problem. We have no special rights to any area above all other users. I think it is plenty reasonable to require use of monopods or tripods collapsed to monopod configuration (still plenty stable) considering that most wildlife photographers nowadays use lenses or cameras with vibration reduction. The number of people who just want to go out and enjoy nature is increasing and they have a right to a peaceful and quiet experience. The clicking of camera shutters is enough annoyance in a natural setting. Put yourself in their place and imagine how you would feel if you just wanted to view the wildlife and enjoy nature in peace.

Joe

SantaFeJoe wrote:I understand your concern, but photographers everywhere can be abusive and possessive of locations. At Bosque del Apache, I was quizzed by management several years ago about the use of tripods at the Flight Deck. They were getting many complaints concerning abusive photographers hogging the deck and asking others to move over, quit shaking the deck by walking, etc. They were seeking input to decide how to deal with the problem. We have no special rights to any area above all other users. I think it is plenty reasonable to require use of monopods or tripods collapsed to monopod configuration (still plenty stable) considering that most wildlife photographers nowadays use lenses or cameras with vibration reduction. The number of people who just want to go out and enjoy nature is increasing and they have a right to a peaceful and quiet experience. The clicking of camera shutters is enough annoyance in a natural setting. Put yourself in their place and imagine how you would feel if you just wanted to view the wildlife and enjoy nature in peace.

Joe

+1
Agree completely. Possession of tripod does not give you special rights.






body{zoom:75%!important;}



body{zoom:75%!important;}

I agree, photographers can be jerks.  I was a person asked to move while photographing on the flight deck at Bosque del Apache.  A well know bird photographer was leading a workshop, and came to the deck late.  He just told me to move so he and his group could be where I was set up.  He seemed to be a bit surprised when I told him to take hike (or something along those lines).  I can totally understand what the NPS is talking about.

Mike

If push comes to shove...Ban the photographers...because what they do is the very least important thing that happens there.
Less important than the wildlife activity.
Less important than the rights/access of wildlife viewers to view in a peaceful setting.
Realize priorities.

I think Its a problem brought on by both the photographer and the birding public. The photographer thinks he is the best thing since Ansell Adams and the birding public despises the site of a tripod. I'll be shooting in May at Maggie Marsh. They have issued a list of things photographers with tripods should try. Its fairly simple. I shot there 3 years ago with a 800mm and tripod. I changed things up 2 years ago and used a monopod with a 300mm, 1.4 & flash. Works great. I been at different venues setting up the tripod and lens and slightly bumped the foot of a fellows tripod. The dirty look that I got really surprised me. So both sides needs to chill out and enjoy what they are looking at. I use the birding public as an extra set of eyes for me.

Cheers
Larry

I would go along with no tripod rule, as long as there was a no selfie-stick rule as well.

SantaFeJoe wrote:I understand your concern, but photographers everywhere can be abusive and possessive of locations. At Bosque del Apache, I was quizzed by management several years ago about the use of tripods at the Flight Deck. They were getting many complaints concerning abusive photographers hogging the deck and asking others to move over, quit shaking the deck by walking, etc. They were seeking input to decide how to deal with the problem. We have no special rights to any area above all other users. I think it is plenty reasonable to require use of monopods or tripods collapsed to monopod configuration (still plenty stable) considering that most wildlife photographers nowadays use lenses or cameras with vibration reduction. The number of people who just want to go out and enjoy nature is increasing and they have a right to a peaceful and quiet experience. The clicking of camera shutters is enough annoyance in a natural setting. Put yourself in their place and imagine how you would feel if you just wanted to view the wildlife and enjoy nature in peace.

Joe

Joe, et al

Nobody's asking anything about "special rights". 

Have you or anyone else who posted here ever been to Brooks Falls?

I've shot at the platform for the entire last week of July and shared the platform with one other photographer for the bulk of that time.

The congestion at BF platform is limited to a very tiny window during peak season.. maybe July 10-25th ... and even during that time late evenings is often quite empty.

Limiting the ban to the dates that the PS have done has nothing to do with the congestion at the platform, at all. It has everything to do with an easier administrative process. 

They already have a ban in place for fishing along the river at that area for that 2-month time frame. That is because of bear traffic along that area of the river. Not because of (human) visitor numbers on the platform. It simply makes zero sense to have a blanket ban on tripod use for 2 months when the problems so limited.

The platform also has NPS employee/volunteer staffing it during busy times, and they tend to deal with problem people pretty quickly.

The "clicking of cameras" isn't hardly as much an annoyance as the incessant air traffic that comes in over the area bringing throngs of visitors (wildlife viewers and fishermen/women). Trying to make an argument out of that is somewhat absurd for this context.

What I can tell you is that this kind of blanket policy has a trickle down effect on what we do. "photographers" and "photography" become labeled "the problem" and restrictions get tighter and more restrictive. I deal with the NPS and the FWS regularly on these issues here in AK. They tend to focus regulatory action from an administrative perspective rather than an operational one. ... Z is easier than Y to administrate, so X becomes the regulation.

And yes, of course any multi-use situations will incur problems. I see that all the time (including the jerk who keeps snow-machining over my ski trail I put in this winter) Even singular-use situations incur problems with people approaching they hobbies/activities differently, and often with little regard for others. I get that. 

The answer (IMO) isn't best put forward with a sledgehammer. Regulations should, where possible, be fine-tuned and focused on teasing apart the problematic from the non-problematic and written accordingly. But far too often they tend not to be.

Photographers have used tripods on the platform since there has been a platform. Increasing use isn't the issue, the number of visitors allowed on the platform at any time is no different today than it was 15 years ago.

Carl

stevenmajor wrote:If push comes to shove...Ban the photographers...because what they do is the very least important thing that happens there.
Less important than the wildlife activity.
Less important than the rights/access of wildlife viewers to view in a peaceful setting.
Realize priorities.

This is a remarkable thing to say. Have you shot at Brooks Falls?

Groups of photographers (tours/workshops) may be a large part of the problem.
For example, artificial lighting at night (light painting) is now banned in Arches, Canyonlands and Grand Teton NPs because of commercial workshops behavior at night. IIRC, a couple of other parks are also considering this ruling and it may eventually be applied to all National Parks. This only applies to commercial photo workshops/tours as of now. (Eventually, I bet it will apply to all photographers.) Lots of stories about night photo tours ugly behavior. There is an attitude from some tour leaders that they own the area in question. I have seen it and it does occur. Lots of complaints on web. I am not condemning all tour groups so don't jump me. SOME cause problems.
Anyway, when resources are limited (space on boardwalk, etc.) compromises must be made. Again, I see no problem banning tripods. And NO, I have not been to Brooks Falls and I will prob never go, because I don't want to fight crowds! or play dueling tripods!

I have never been to Brooks Falls, but here are some links from people who have. The last few are images of the crowds. Their experience is certainly not unique. I haven't been on the Flight Deck  at Bosque del Apache for sunrise or sunset in over 20 years either due to crowds, but I know what it is like.

https://rebeccalatsonphotography.me/201 ... -platform/

http://www.oceanlight.com/log/brooks-lo ... laska.html

http://www.terragalleria.com/blog/photo ... oks-falls/

http://ericrock.zenfolio.com/blog/2014/ ... ooks-falls

https://www.cameralabs.com/bear-photogr ... oks-falls/

http://www.terragalleria.com/parks/np-i ... m0056.html

https://twitter.com/markboster/status/4 ... 9875488769

http://www.masterfile.com/image/en/854- ... i-National

https://www.nps.gov/katm/blogs/People-P ... -Bears.htm


Joe

EGrav wrote:Groups of photographers (tours/workshops) may be a large part of the problem.
For example, artificial lighting at night (light painting) is now banned in Arches, Canyonlands and Grand Teton NPs because of commercial workshops behavior at night. IIRC, a couple of other parks are also considering this ruling and it may eventually be applied to all National Parks. This only applies to commercial photo workshops/tours as of now. (Eventually, I bet it will apply to all photographers.) Lots of stories about night photo tours ugly behavior. There is an attitude from some tour leaders that they own the area in question. I have seen it and it does occur. Lots of complaints on web. I am not condemning all tour groups so don't jump me. SOME cause problems.
Anyway, when resources are limited (space on boardwalk, etc.) compromises must be made. Again, I see no problem banning tripods. And NO, I have not been to Brooks Falls and I will prob never go, because I don't want to fight crowds! or play dueling tripods!

I do think groups of photographers tend to often become problematic busy places. And just as much, sometimes, in non-busy places. The power of numbers weighs a lot.

But I disagree with the suggested premise that NPS restrictions to commercial operators is simply a response to commercial operator problems.

Understand the process behind regulatory procedure. To write a public regulation, the NEPA process is a lengthy and involved task. To write a CUA stipulation (essentially, rules that only apply to Commercial operators, with Commercial Use Authorization permits) is easily done. No public comment is even required. 

What I see from a number of federal gov't agencies lately is the use of this tool to manage situations and people instead of the correct CFR or NP Compendium tool. 

An example.

If the NPS deems there are too many people in a given area, to limit that number, or close the area is a complicated process. In Hallo Bay, for example, the workaround was to write a CUA stip banning commercial use operators from "Nursery Rock". Not because commercial users were a problem, any more so than non-commercial users .. but because that's an easier way to administer things.

To make a public closure would rile the Alaska State gov. To close it to commercial operators doesn't rile anyone (other than commercial operators and our clients).

Another example is the backcountry entry to Gates of the Arctic National Park. They have a little video and orientation they want visitors to sit though and watch. But to require that of everyone would require the entire public comment process and too many people, particularly Alaska locals, would object. So instead it's a requirement for all CUA holders and their clients to sit through the program before entering the park, every single time they enter the park.

That means people who guide in the park are required to sit through it with our clients. To not do so puts us in violation of our permit conditions. The general public visitor is not required. So Joe from Florida, who's never visited Alaska before, never set foot on trailers wilderness or hiked around grizzly bears or alpine and arctic conditions has zero requirement to attend. I first backpacked in the park almost 20 years ago. I've attended countless programs and courses on wilderness leadership, wilderness safety, first aid, SAR, etc, etc, etc .. and I give all my clients a lengthy safety talk before the trip, as well as briefings throughout the trip and email a comprehensive trip info packet about backcountry safety.

Yet the NPS rules require my clients to watch their video on how to not feed bears, but no member of the general public.

You're right, groups can be an imposition on other visitors. And commercial operators can too. But the visitors from Florida we ran into 2 years ago who were illegally and irresponsibly firing round after round from their 3 firearms maybe 100 yards away from group, with no idea at all that we were there, were problematic as well. They aren't required to sit through anything.

Sometimes the rules aren't written for the reasons you think they are.

SantaFeJoe wrote:I have never been to Brooks Falls, but here are some links from people who have. The last few are images of the crowds. Their experience is certainly not unique. I haven't been on the Flight Deck  at Bosque del Apache for sunrise or sunset in over 20 years either due to crowds, but I know what it is like.

https://rebeccalatsonphotography.me/201 ... -platform/

http://www.oceanlight.com/log/brooks-lo ... laska.html

http://www.terragalleria.com/blog/photo ... oks-falls/

http://ericrock.zenfolio.com/blog/2014/ ... ooks-falls

https://www.cameralabs.com/bear-photogr ... oks-falls/

http://www.terragalleria.com/parks/np-i ... m0056.html

https://twitter.com/markboster/status/4 ... 9875488769

http://www.masterfile.com/image/en/854- ... i-National

https://www.nps.gov/katm/blogs/People-P ... -Bears.htm


Joe

I started reading through the first post .. and when she said "[font=Georgia, Bitstream Charter, serif]The photo above makes it look like there’s not many people at the platform, but I can tell you for a fact that when this image was taken, both lower and upper tiers were crowded cheek-by-jowl with photographers, their tripods and their supertelephoto lenses.  It was only thanks to a couple of forbearing photographers that I was able to squeeze in to a spot between them with my own tripod and (rented) super telephoto.[/font]" 

I did a double take. That's an outright lie.
here's the image https://rebeccalatsonphotography.files. ... =966&h=644

Here's what Phil says on the second post

"[font=Open Sans] [/font][font=Open Sans]I had heard horror stories about visitors being very frustrated by crowds at the Falls Platform and not feeling that they were able to spend enough time there, so I deliberately scheduled twice as many days at Brooks Camp as I thought I would need to account for this possibility. In my experience the crowds were not a great problem, and I only observed a waiting list in the afternoons, when day visitors (those who fly in by float plane to view bears and fly out again the same day) were present. By about 6pm all day visitors have left, and the crowds are no longer an issue.[/font]"

Read all of his comments on "Etiquette" underneath that.

Anyway .. that's all .. if we as a photography community care about what we do, speaking with the agencies who manage the land on which we often do it is important. Obviously we don't have to do that if we don't want to.

Cheers
Carl

Hey Carl

I communicated with Rebecca and she stands by her story.
No matter what, it is hard to deny the effects on others of using a tripod in the following photo. The difference in space occupied by those with tripods, as opposed to those without, is very obvious to any viewer. I am being open minded to others opposing opinions, but too many photographers say much the same thing about overcrowding due to tripods. Click on the image for an enlarged view.

https://twitter.com/markboster/status/4 ... 9875488769

Whatever the case, this is my kind of shooting- in the wild away from they crowded decks:

http://www.naturephotographers.net/arti ... 002-1.html

Thanks for that one.

Joe

I was there 30 years ago.  We  were doing this even back then w/o being told to.  The platform was small and you could stay as long as you wanted.

SantaFeJoe wrote:Hey Carl

I communicated with Rebecca and she stands by her story.
No matter what, it is hard to deny the effects on others of using a tripod in the following photo. The difference in space occupied by those with tripods, as opposed to those without, is very obvious to any viewer. I am being open minded to others opposing opinions, but too many photographers say much the same thing about overcrowding due to tripods. Click on the image for an enlarged view.

https://twitter.com/markboster/status/4 ... 9875488769

Whatever the case, this is my kind of shooting- in the wild away from they crowded decks:

http://www.naturephotographers.net/arti ... 002-1.html

Thanks for that one.

Joe

Hey Joe

That's the majority of my time in the field, as well.

Mark's picture shows a crowded platform. Rebecca's shows the upper platform with nobody on the entire right hand side of it. But even looking at Mark's image I don't see a reason to prohibit tripods. Nobody in that image is without a view of room to do their thing.

I'd never suggest a tripod doesn't take up more room than no tripod. Or even that, at times, reducing a tripod to a monopod is good form. And even, at times, should be mandatory.

But there's simply no reason to prohibit tripod use from the platform there for 2 months of the year. That's simply insane.

It's also worth noting that both the Katmai Superintendent and the head ranger there are both new this year, and haven't even been in the park, at all, in the summer.

Cheers

Carl