This was just brought to my attention because this piece in the Washington Post was then posted on the Shutterbug and NPPA site. I’ve seen these headlines a lot over the decades so I clicked on the link to the Federal Register to read for myself where it states:
This language is taken right from Proposed Directive:
“The current language has been in place for 48 months. This proposal would make permanent guidelines for the acceptance and denial for still photography and commercial filming permits in congressionally designated wilderness areas.”
This is not new, been in place for 48 months, that’s four years now. I am not a lawyer and I could be totally wrong, but the language in this Proposed Directive is about the same as what you read when you apply for a permit in a National Park to conduct a photographic workshop / commercial shoot on those public lands. The difference here is the price is much higher. I strongly urge you to click on the Federal Registry link, read the fine print for yourself and decide if you should comment on this proposal. I did make a comment asking that Commercial Still photography be clearly defined as such and not in the vague language it is now. Read the fine print, it appears this only applies to commercial shoots, not the US public enjoying THEIR lands with a camera.