by pra_ggresion » Fri Nov 03, 2017 10:35 am
As for the mega "court licensed photographer" kook, my fantasy is that he called the sheriff and let the sheriff watch his footage. Sheriff can only stomach up to the 3:00 minute mark and promptly starts beating the dude before arresting him for feloniously kookery Section-442.19.
To me it's not so much of a worry knowing about the spot. Everyone knows about it. Cat got out of the bag a long time ago. I had a guy bring it up to me in Peru! The problem is showing people how it works, and when it's good. Allowing footage puts a place on the forefront of people's minds and increases their likelihood of visiting. Good spots have a "musical chairs" dynamic. It's a preventative measure in that respect. On top of that, spots that are good are often special places regardless of whether or not they're surfed. More people equals more disrespect to the place it's self in the form of pollution and overcrowding. Places like that deserve a decorum that prompts stewardship, etiquette and general good behavior. I think of good spots like they're an actively used temple. One does not just walk into the middle of baptism in whatever religious ceremony and start sticking their camera into everyone's grill for example. Similarly blowing a place up with images is simply bad form. I feel the same way with photos of swimming holes, waterfalls, caves, etc.. There's plenty of places set aside or not threatened that are sanctioned for images if people carry a sense of judgement derived from respect for nature. Take video of Shorties, PC, Agate all day long. Those places are set aside. That's my take at least.
Potato salad or die!