Post by: John B on September 29, 2014, 04:43:08 PM
Post by: JJB11B on September 29, 2014, 04:44:05 PM
Post by: jackelope on September 29, 2014, 04:53:13 PM
Post by: runamuk on September 29, 2014, 04:56:44 PM
Post by: jackelope on September 29, 2014, 05:05:18 PM
Post by: Netminder01 on September 29, 2014, 05:13:14 PM
Post by: JJB11B on September 29, 2014, 05:17:11 PM
Post by: jackelope on September 29, 2014, 05:25:50 PM
Post by: Netminder01 on September 29, 2014, 05:29:13 PM
I dont believe a "security guard" has the authority to turn away someone from public land. Maybe whoever runs/owns the land.
Yes, you're probably correct but let me clarify.
Although most people wouldn't have the "authority" to turn a people away, the point I was trying to illustrate was the filming crew would need to be licensed and apply for permits. When they apply for permits, they also need to post them with a reasonable amount of time and in reasonable places in order to provide notice but more importantly, one of the crew (usually the PA) must have it on them at all times and produce it if asked.
In this case, it seems like the state would also have a copy (being a park) but I don't think they're permitted to close the park. The more interesting aspect of this is the release - when filming in public or when an average passer-by could be in the shot the crew needs to provide ample notification that 'this area' or 'that area' would be in the shot. This reduces the requirement of the crew from getting releases from everyone.
Post by: JJB11B on September 29, 2014, 05:31:54 PM
Post by: John B on September 29, 2014, 05:47:08 PM
Post by: JJB11B on September 29, 2014, 05:49:50 PM
you know it just ocurred to me that the Hanford Reservation is public "federal" land and there is a private security company that keeps John Q Public out of there.....So I am wrong to some extent with my previous commentI dont believe a "security guard" has the authority to turn away someone from public land. Maybe whoever runs/owns the land.
Yes, you're probably correct but let me clarify.
Although most people wouldn't have the "authority" to turn a people away, the point I was trying to illustrate was the filming crew would need to be licensed and apply for permits. When they apply for permits, they also need to post them with a reasonable amount of time and in reasonable places in order to provide notice but more importantly, one of the crew (usually the PA) must have it on them at all times and produce it if asked.
In this case, it seems like the state would also have a copy (being a park) but I don't think they're permitted to close the park. The more interesting aspect of this is the release - when filming in public or when an average passer-by could be in the shot the crew needs to provide ample notification that 'this area' or 'that area' would be in the shot. This reduces the requirement of the crew from getting releases from everyone.
Post by: Netminder01 on September 30, 2014, 08:17:20 AM
I see your point...Still I'd have a hard time turning around and leaving...
I agree! If you ever encounter this sort of thing again - especially in the woods you can ask to see the permit or ask to speak to the PA (Production Assistant); they should be more than willing to show it to you. In fact, if the WSP had officers out there, they might have had a copy also.
Still sucks tho!
Post by: huntinguy on September 30, 2014, 08:41:08 AM
[/quote]you know it just ocurred to me that the Hanford Reservation is public "federal" land and there is a private security company that keeps John Q Public out of there.....So I am wrong to some extent with my previous comment
[/quote]
Federal land and Public land are not the same. Hanford is a Federal Facility, and was never set up for public access. Where as a Federal Forest is for public access.
Good question by the OP. Waiting to see what answer he gets back.
Post by: John B on September 30, 2014, 12:13:27 PM