We could treat the ocean like a art museum.

Outer Bamnks diving on the Great Escape Southern California Live-Aboard Dive Boat

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Mojo Mike on April 22, 2007 at 18:41:03:

In Reply to: C'mon Mig, i didn't bust him up that bad...:) posted by Brad on April 21, 2007 at 16:08:32:

While traveling in eastern Europe and visiting some art museums. There was a charge for admission and an additional charge for taking photographs. Which was about 50% of the price of admission. I happily paid the additional charge to be allowed to photograph.

Now imagine how much revenue could be generated to protect our ocean. If every photographer had to pay to photograph on and under the water or better yet, at every state park and state beach. Just imagine how much money could be generated to protect the places we all love. Photographers could apply for a one day license, 1 week license or annual photography license. Now if you are a non-resident the price goes sky high. Of course this sooner or later would catch on in other countries. So when you go to Cozumel you also need a Mexican photography license, not forgetting all the other Caribbean islands. That also want money to protect their dive environments. Lets not forget those special stamps. There could be a stamp for taking photographs of invertebrates, and another for ling cod during the spawning months, another for mammals, etc.

Only a certain number of photographers are allowed at offshore dive sites including oil rigs. An annual drawing will be held to select these divers. No choice is allowed for a offshore photography location. Only 100 photographers per dive site per year is allowed.

Any photographs taken of undersized fish, out of season fish or of sea life without the appropriate stamp. Is just cause for confiscation of all photographs and photography equipment.

A commercial photography license would be required for video cameras. With a minimum required amount of video shot annually to maintain that commercial license. Photographers are not allowed to sale or trade their photographs unless they have a commercial license. Which requires a video camera to obtain.

Oh of course photographers would need to display their photography license in plain view. So photography wardens can check on them through binoculars from a discreet distance. There should be two free photography days a year and a photography license would not be required on a pier.

To be fair there should be a limit on how much California photographers should be charged annually. Fishing licenses generated 50 million dollars last year. An equal amount from California photographers should really help protect our dive locations.

There would be a maximum restriction on the size and numbers of strobes. Dual strobes would only be allowed with a special permit. The number and location of photographs of rarer sea life has to be reported to the California Dept. of Underwater and Coastal Photographs.

I hope you realize I am only teasing. I just wanted to make a point ;-) I wonder how many photographers would be willing to play by the same rules as fishermen. The ocean belongs to all of us. It takes all marine lovers to take care of her. Chris feel free to delete this post. Before some self righteous politician reads it and gets inspired.

Follow Ups:

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Post Background Color: White     Black
Post Area Page Width: Normal   Full
You must type in the
scrambled text key to
the right.
This is required to
help prevent spam bots
from flooding this BBS.
Text Key: