Forest Service delaying media wilderness photography rules amid growing outcry about First Amendment

Amid growing public outcry, the U.S. Forest Service announced Thursday it will delay finalizing restrictive rules requiring media to get special permits to shoot photos or videos in wilderness areas.

The federal agency will allow public comment for an additional month, until Dec. 3, Forest Service spokesman Larry Chambers said, and set up meetings to answer questions from journalists, wilderness groups and the public.

"The Forest Service proposed directive on commercial filming in wilderness has been in place for more than four years and is a good faith effort to ensure the fullest protection of America's wild places," Chambers said in a statement.

The delay comes as Oregon legislators, media and First Amendment advocates expressed alarm about the federal plan to require reporters and photographers to pay for a permit and get permission before shooting a photo or video in 36 million acres of federally designated wilderness managed by the Forest Service.

The rules, currently in place but now being finalized, allow exceptions only for breaking news coverage of events like fires and rescues. They're more restrictive than similar policies on wilderness areas managed by a different federal agency, the Bureau of Land Management.

By contrast, the Forest Service is giving its supervisors discretion to decide whether a news outlet's planned video or photo shoots would meet the Wilderness Act's conservation goals.

"I am very concerned about the implications this has for Americans' First Amendment freedoms of speech and the press," U.S. Rep. Greg Walden, an Oregon Republican, said in a Thursday letter to Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell. "It is also very troubling that journalists could be held to different standards at the discretion of the issuing officer."

Walden was one of a growing number of federal policymakers to urge the Forest Service to withdraw its proposal. He was joined by Oregon lawmakers and those across the West, from Washington Rep. Derek Kilmer to Sen. Mark Udall, a Colorado Democrat.

Sen. Ron Wyden, U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio and U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, all Oregon Democrats, said the policy should be scrapped.

@robwdavis Outrageous that Forest Service even considers denying media access to public lands, who gets access, and how much to charge them

— Earl Blumenauer (@repblumenauer) September 25, 2014

Delay isn’t enough. @forestservice needs to scrap its unconstitutional wilderness photo rule http://t.co/2keJ2rLzVN

— WydenPress (@WydenPress) September 25, 2014

"What does the Forest Service plan to do next—monitor Instagram accounts and fine users that post pictures of our wilderness areas?" DeFazio said. 

First Amendment advocates say the rules ignore press freedoms and are so vague they'd allow the Forest Service to grant permits only to favored reporters shooting videos for positive stories.

Permits cost up to $1,500, Chambers has said, and reporters who don't get a permit could face fines up to $1,000.

Wilderness supporters are also critical of the plan. Paul Spitler, wilderness campaigns director at The Wilderness Society, a national nonprofit that advocates for expanding wild areas, said the proposal fails to recognize most photography has no impact.

"Protecting our remaining wild landscapes is critical, but we need to use a little common sense and make sure people can also access and experience these places," Spitler said. "Wilderness is supposed to be protected for people, not from people." 

-- Rob Davis