> > From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2006/05/01 Mon PM 08:22:35 GMT > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Paying to shoot in US National Parks > > Actually in theory it's our land, and it would be interesting to see > what the courts say...
Using email shorthand again. I should have said "They are in charge of the land...". Meant in its proper sense of "having responsibility for" rather than the management version, "having power over". > > > mike wilson wrote: > > >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 15:08:40 US/Eastern > >>To: [email protected] > >>Subject: Paying to shoot in US National Parks > >> > >> Topic has started on another list i'm on, but no definitive > >> answer.. > >> > >>For those that frequent the parks, do you pay as an amature photographer, > >>or is this > >>something more > >>for the on location film shoot people, using models etc.. > >> > >>I know up here we don't have to pay. > >> > >> > >> > > > >It's only a matter of time. In the UK, the national organisation that looks > >after much of the building heritage has banned indoor photography for the > >last decade or so. Partly for "security" and partly to make you buy the > >guidebooks and postcards. The same will happen in National Parks, although > >it will be more difficult to enforce. It's their land so they make the > >rules. > > > >m > > > > > >----------------------------------------- > >Email sent from www.ntlworld.com > >Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software > >Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > When you're worried or in doubt, > Run in circles, (scream and shout). > > ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
