Complex Land Use Authorizations:

Issuing Permits for Commercial Filming On Public Lands

A Telecast Originating from the BLM National Training Center

May 18^th^, 2000 - **Second Day**

This transcript is from the closed-captioning file produced during the
telecast. It may contain errors and omissions in transcription.

Announcer: the Bureau of Land Management Satellite Network Presents Live
from the BLM National Training Center in Phoenix, Arizona, \"Complex
Land Use Authorizations: Issuing Permits for Commercial Filming On
Public Lands.\" Course 2000‑16. And Now, the Host of Your Program, Chip
Calamaio.

C. Calamaio: Good Morning, Everyone and Welcome to the Second Day of Our
Training Course on Issuing Permits for Commercial Filming on Public
Lands. The First Thing We\'re Going to Do this Morning Is Get into the
Nepa Process as it Relates to Applications for Film Permits. In Our Case
Study the Epic Yet Phony Hollywood Film \"Far Beyond.\" With Me Again
Today from Moab Utah Is Mary von Koch. Good Morning.

M. von Koch: Good Morning, Chip. For the Students, We Left You With
Exercise Number 3 Yesterday Afternoon. We Will Get to the Answers to
That Exercise When We Get to the Impact Analysis of the Ea a Little Late
They Are Morning. Thank You.

C. Calamaio: Mary. Joining Us for the First Session Is Morning Is Peter
Graves from The BLM Field Office in Ridgecrest, California. We
Appreciate You Taking the Time to Share Experiences with Us.

P. Graves: Thank You, Chip. Good Morning. It\'s Great to Be Here in
Phoenix To Share My Thoughts and Experiences with Filming on Public
Land. I\'m Looking Forward to an Informative and Entertaining Dialogue
Today. For Those of You Who Do Not Know, Ridgecrest Is Approximately 160
Miles Northeast of Los Angeles. Ridgecrest\'s Close Proximity to Los
Angeles and the Fact We Have An Aggressive Film Commission Results in
Our Office Authorizing Approximately 70 Permits a Year.

C. Calamaio: Thanks, Peter. Sounds like You Guys Are Busy Over There.

P. Graves: Yes, We Are. Always Kept on Our Toes.

C. Calamaio: Late They Are Morning, Leigh von Der Esch Will Again Be
with Us to Provide the Perspective from the Film Commission Perspective
and Industry Perspective. Like Yesterday, Any Time You Have a Question
or Comment for The Instructors, Give Us a Call Or Send a Fax Using the
Numbers Proceed Provided in Your Workbooks Which We Hope You Haven\'t
Misplaced Overnight Because You Will Need Them Today. One of the Things
You Will Be Needing Is the Evaluation for This Satellite Course. It\'s
Located in the Back of the Book. We\'ve Also E‑mailed You an Electronic
Copy. At the End of Today\'s Show We Would like to You Either Mail in A
Completed Copy of the Evaluation or Respond to the E‑mail. We Appreciate
Your Help in Giving Us Some Feedback on this Broadcast and this Form of
Satellite Training. Before We Get Started with Nepa, There Is a Few
House Keeping Things We\'d like to Talk About. Yesterday I Kind of Gave
Everybody a Little Grief about Not Faxing Things In. We Apologize. It
Wasn\'t You Guys. We Were Having Fax Machine Problems and I Have Been
Told The Offending Machine Has Been Put out of its Misery. We Should Be
Good to Go this Morning. So We Did Good Get a Lot of Faxes in at Lunch
Time from the Exercise Which We Have Passed on To Mary and Our Other
Instructors and We Are Going to Go over Some Other Faxes this Morning
Before We Get Started. One of the First Things We Had Is a Note That
Came in from Prineville Jim with the Forest Service, and We Know
There\'s Quite a Bit of Forest Service Viewers Who Are Joining Us and
Kind of Auditing the Satellite Course. The Question Was, You Know, Based
on the BLM Perspective on This, There Was Some Questions To Why We
Weren\'t Getting into Some of the Forest Service Process as Far as Film
Permit Applications and Things like That. The Background Is, this Was
Really Designed as a BLM Satellite Training Course and I Guess in the
Spirit of Trying to Develop Consistency among Agencies, We\'ve Asked
Viewers From Other Natural Resource Management Agencies to Sort of Audit
or Participate with Us, And I Know We\'ve Got about 11 Folks from the
Forest Service Who Are Watching Today. I Got a Call Yesterday from Glen
Canyon Recreation Area That We Have Folks from the Park Service Watching
and I Think for Those Of You from Other Agencies, Contact Your
Washington Office Lands Program for Clarification On Some of the
Particulars of Your Film Permit Process. Many of the Environmental Laws
That We\'re Talking about Today In Terms of National Environmental
Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, Across Agency ‑‑ Cross Agency
Boundaries and Much of this Is Consistent for All of Our Viewers. So We
Hope That Clarifies That. Before We Continue with Some General Questions
We\'ve Received, by like to Turn it Over to Mary and Mary, I Believe You
Have Information That Came Into You via E‑mail?

M. von Koch: Yes. I Thought Yesterday That I Was Clear in Letting You
Know That In ‑‑ for the Determination of Minimum Impact That the
Washington Office Instruction Memorandum Was Expired Guidance And That
it Was Only Our Office That Chose to Continue Using That Guidance for
the Checklist That I Had Went Through for the \"Far Beyond\" Project.
What I Would like to Make Sure That Is Really Clear Is That the
Determination of Minimum Impact Is on an Office by Office Basis And the
Guidance Is Expired. It\'s There If People Choose to Use It, but It\'s
Not Mandatory, And It\'s Only for Consistency That We Use it in Our
Office. I\'d Also like to Mention, I Have ‑‑ Yesterday We Had a Question
From Our Students. They\'re Following Our Outline Format, and We Did Not
Touch on A Couple of Items, and They Wanted to Have the Answers ‑‑ And
They Wanted to Have the Answers. The Filming Industry Needs Flexibility
Within Locations for Lighting, Camera Angles and Time Of Day. And the
Film Industry Needs Consistency, Clarity and Speed. I\'d like to
Reiterate That the Outline Is Just a Tool for to You Follow along with
the Broadcast. When I Put That Together, it Was Based on Information
That We Had Months Ago, and So There Is the Possibility as I Illustrated
Here That You\'re Not Going to Get Everything Word by Word to Help You
Fill out the Outline. So There\'s No Test, Just Follow Along and Enjoy
the Broadcast.

C. Calamaio: Thanks, Mary. We Had a Question That Came in That Wasn\'t a
Name on Here, but These Are from Our Friends in Northern New Mexico in
Taos and Want to Know If All Offices Are Using the Same Fee Schedules.

M. von Koch: I\'m Really Not Sure. I Know the Rental Schedule That I
Showed You on the Checklist That We Send out Is Used in Utah. In Talking
to Peter, They Use The Same Schedule in California. And Whether Other
States Use Different Schedules, I Really Am Not Sure.

C. Calamaio: Well, Thanks for Sending That In, Taos. We Got a Fax from
Ruben at the Glenwood Field Office and I Know This Is about Knock Us
Weeds Which Is ‑‑ Knox Us Weeds. The Question Is the Plan of Development
Should Include Knox Us Weed Mitigation Measures. Could BLM Retain the
Bond for a Come Years to Cover the Possible Costs of Weed Eradication
Efforts?

M. von Koch: the Answer Is Yes, and the Best Example I Have Is for
\"City Slickers Two\" with That Stampede Scene We\'ve Been Showing ‑‑ We
Have ‑‑ We Did Yesterday and Will Show Again Today. In That Situation
Where the Reclamation ‑‑ We Were Kind of Unsure about How Soon We Would
Start Establishing Native Vegetation and Get Passed Just The Invader
Species. We Did Hold Their Reclamation Bond, I Think, for ‑‑ it Was
Either Three or Four Years. So it Is Possible to Do That.

C. Calamaio: Thanks for Sending That In, Ruben. Dan up at the Northern
Field Office in Fairbanks, Alaska, His Question Is That Filming on
Public Lands Is a Good Way to Positively Portray Our Lands, Facilities
and Activities. However, Many Resource Specialists Are Fearful Too Much
Paper Work Will Just Send Production Companies to Another Location.
Wondered If We Had Any Comments On Than. Peter, You Want to Take That
One?

P. Graves: I Think That\'s Probably More of a Leigh Question. We Do Run
into Problems Where Each Office Has to Get Things Done Immediately, and
Some of The Offices Have More Paper Work, Others Don\'t. So If People
Leave Because They Don\'t Want Paper Work, Then Maybe We Really Don\'t
Want Them In Our Area.

C. Calamaio: Well, I Guess It\'s Part of the ‑‑ What We Discussed
Yesterday, It\'s Part Of the Way of Doing Business.

P. Graves: Part of the Process to Get a Permit, Yes.

C. Calamaio: Wendy from Meeker, Colorado, Had a Question, and I\'ll
Probably Throw this One to Mary. She Asked If We Could Please Redefine
Primary Staging Areas And Secondary Staging Areas.

M. von Koch: Sure. I Would Be Happy To. The Primary Staging Area Is
Generally an Area ‑‑ in Our Situation We Prefer to Be Disturbed, and You
Have to Have Enough Room for the Company to Put Anywhere from 40 to 60
Vehicles. Generally They\'ll Have Several Semitrucks, Catering Tent And,
Oh, I\'d Say Anywhere from 30 to 40 Other Vehicles and this Is Kind of
like a Self‑contained Village That the Company Works Out Of, and
Generally They Want To Be, I Would Say, No Part than Five to Ten Miles
from the Actual Filming Locations. The Secondary Staging Area Has To Be
Much Closer to the Filming Location and Would Have the Equipment That
They Need Immediately to Supply the Camera And for the Actual Filming.
Would it Consist of a Lot Fewer Vehicles, and If You Remember, We Showed
You a Secondary Staging Area for the Dialogue Scene of \"Chill Factor.\"
We Had Five Semitrucks and No Catering Tent and a Few Other Vehicles.
That Was a Secondary Staging Area. It Was Just the Equipment and People
That They Need to Do Supply the Camera for the Actual Filming.

C. Calamaio: Thanks, Mary. Thanks, Wendy, for Sending That In. We Have a
Question That Came in From Susan and Madelyn and They Wanted to Know, it
Said, During Your Discussion, Please Elaborate on the Specific Instances
of When a Notice of Realty Action Is Required. Newspaper Publication
Requirements, Federal Register Requirements, Other Public Notification
Requirements.

M. von Koch: I Assume That Means Specifically for Filming. I Know That
in the Regulations It States That If Film Permit Does Not Meet Minimum
Impact Criteria That a Notice of Realty Action Will Be Published and I
Know of No Instances Where That Has Actually Happened. Remember That the
2920 Regulations Also Cover Leases And Easements and I Know That We
Definitely Do Publish the Notice Of Realty Action in a Situation With
Leases, and Hopefully this Will Be a Lot Clearer When We Get Our New
2920 Regulations. As Far as Other Publications, I Know That We\'ve
Sometimes Published a Notice in Our Local Newspaper to Let Our Public
Know That an Environmental Assessment Is Available for Public Comment,
But Those Are the Only Instances That I Can Think Of. There Should Be No
Federal Register Notices Associated with Film Permits.

C. Calamaio: Thank You Both For Sending That In. Charlie in Durango,
Colorado, Has a Very Interesting Question. He Wants to Know If in
Developing a Completed Case File On Each Film Project Are You Requiring
the Permittee to Provide BLM with Copies of the Finished Film?

P. Graves: You Want the Answer to That?

C. Calamaio: Jump In.

P. Graves: That\'s One of the Stipulations We Have in Ridgecrest, as
Well in Moab, That They Furnish a Finished Product and Also Give Us a
Credit. Whether They Do or Not, It\'s Speculation. We Really Can\'t
Enforce it after The Fact. I Think it Would Be Very Unlikely If We
Required a Bond For Them until They Gave Us a Finished Product, but Some
of The Companies Do and Some of Them Don\'t. Same Thing with the
Credits. Some of Them Give Us a Credit, Some Don\'t.

M. von Koch: I Would like to Go into That Further, Because I Think That
Was Something That Came up in Some Other Questions Yesterday. In Our
Standard Stipulation Package, We Do Have a Requirement That the Company
Acknowledge Filming Location on BLM Lands Managed by Our Office, But
There\'s a Caveat, \"If Feasible,\" and the Reason for That Is That Most
Commercials And Still Ads, Having That Acknowledgment Is Not Feasible.
For Most Movies, They Already Do Have Credits, and They Should Be
Including the BLM in Their Acknowledgments. I Do Not Go Back and Make
Sure That That Stipulation Is Complied With.

C. Calamaio: I Know from Our Perspective at the Training Center, a Lot
of Times We Would Like to Show Clips from Some of These Films for
Courses Just Like this So That We Can Illustrate Just for Internal
Government Training Purposes Some of the Issues Related to Filming on
Public Lands.

M. von Koch: and You\'ve Mentioned That, Chip, and I Think That Would Be
a Really Good Idea. You\'re Asking That We Add Another Stipulation to
Our Permit So That We Have the License to Go Ahead and Use Footage from
the Finished Product for Our Training Purposes, and I Think That That
Would Actually Be a Very Good Idea So That When We Show Clips Like We
Did Yesterday, We Don\'t Have to Go Through All the Rigmarole of Making
Sure That It\'s Legal.

C. Calamaio: and Couple Times We\'ve Tried and We\'re Told No.

P. Graves: We Do Have a Stipulation in Ridgecrest Where We Basically Say
It\'s for Educational Purposes and Government Purposes and They Assign
It, and So They Agree to It. So We Use it for ‑‑ like We Go To Trade
Shows with the Ridgecrest Film Commission, They Use it at Trade Shows
and That\'s Why We Have Films and Stuff We Could Use to Promote
Ridgecrest.

C. Calamaio: Great Question, Charlie. This One I\'m Going to Toss to
Peter. This Is from Steve Upstairs at Our Lands Academy and He Wants To
Know, What Is BLM\'s Liability If While Following Directions We Have
Given the Permit Holder There Is an Accident That Results in an Injury
or a Fatality?

P. Graves: That\'s Kind of a Tricky Question, Steve. Because BLM Has ‑‑
You Know, Obviously ‑‑ Some ‑‑ We Have Stipulations in Ridgecrest Where
The Company Has to Indemnify the BLM. Obviously That May or May Not
Work. If It\'s BLM\'s Gross Negligence, Then We Could Be Held Liable. I
Kind of Don\'t Really Want to Get into Liability Issues. That\'s More
for Our Solicitors To Discuss. But We Can ‑‑ You Know, We Could Be Held
Liable, but It\'s Something We Have to Fight out In Courts and Talk to
Our Solicitors If an Accident Does Happen.

C. Calamaio: Thanks, Pete. From Palm Springs, Mark Sent in A Question. I
Know We Are ‑‑ this Is Part of Our Curriculum this Afternoon. It\'s a
Compliance Question on Major Films. Wanting to Know If We Monitor Every
Day and If So, How Is it Budgeted For, Hourly, Monthly, Based on the
Great Level of the Grade Level of the Staff Specialist, et Cetera ‑‑.

I Would Assume We\'re Talking About Situation with Full Cost
Reimbursement, and the Question About How Often, I Think at the
Beginning of a Project, or When The Company Is Moving into a New
Location, That\'s Definitely the Time That We Would Want as Much
Coverage as Possible. When We Did \"Geronimo,\" We Had The Company
Working from ‑‑ from Day Break until Dark and So We Were Talking about
15‑hour Days In the Summertime, and We Wanted To Have BLM People There
with Them at All Times, Which Required ‑‑ We Had Three People From Our
Office Full Time Monitoring That Project, and Because of the Long Hours,
We Ended up with Split Shifts for BLM People So That We Would Have
Full‑time Coverage. Because it Was Full‑cost Reimbursement Account, We
Had Gone Ahead and Done an Estimate Of What it Would Cost for the BLM to
Provide That Service. We Collected the Money. We Charged Against It. And
I Believe We Ended up Having To Go Back to the Company One Time and Ask
for Additional Monies to Be Deposited into the Account, but the BLM Did
Cover It the Whole Time. In That Situation Where We Had Large Numbers of
People, Large Numbers of Livestock, We Had Cavalry Scenes, We Definitely
Had a BLM Person at All Times on Location and the Company Paid For it
All.

C. Calamaio: as They Say in The News, this Just in ‑‑ this Is from
Shirley up at the Lands Academy Upstairs. Great Question. Actually,
It\'s a Two‑part Question. The First One Was ‑‑ Please Address Airspace
Again. I Believe They\'re Probably Talking about Overflights of Fixed
Wing and Helicopters. Before I Go to the Second Question ‑‑

M. von Koch: Ok. I\'d Say That the Airspace at Least from a Thousand
Feet above Ground to Ground Level Is under The Jurisdiction of the BLM
over BLM Lands, and If We Have Low Flights and They\'re Actually
Filming, That a BLM Permit Is Required. What I Also Said Yesterday Was
That the National Park Service Goes up to 2000 Feet and They Claim to
Have Jurisdiction over That Amount of Airspace. And So If We Want to Be
Consist At the Present Time with the Park Service, That Would Be the
Elevation That We Would Select. In Either Case, Low Elevation Filming
and Use of the ‑‑ with The Background Being Public Lands Does Require
Film Permit.

C. Calamaio: and the Second Part of Shirley\'s Question, She Said I
Notice All the Discussions Have Not Talked About Having Fuel on Site. Is
Fuel Allowed for Vehicles? Aircraft? Things like That?

P. Graves: We\'re Going to Get Into That Later Today When We Get into
the Ea for \"Far Beyond.\"

M. von Koch: Right, Because That Ties into Hazardous Materials.

C. Calamaio: Well, We Really Appreciate These Faxes. I Think We\'re
Caught up on All Of the Questions You Sent in Yesterday. Also like to
Mention Just a Quick Hello. I Found out That We Have a Group Of BLM
Realty Folks from Southwest Utah That All Got Together in Kanab to
Participate In this Training. Wanted to Say Hello to Lorraine, Bill and
Butch and Maybe We\'ll Ask You Guys to Give Us a Call Or Send Us a Fax
as We Go Through Our Broadcast Today. Now It\'s Time for Nepa. And to
Get Things Started, Peter Is Going to Give Us an Overview Of How BLM
Will Evaluate the Plan of Development Using the Nepa Process. As Peter
Discusses Nepa, Please Discuss the Reference Materials In Your Workbook
on Pages 3.3 to 3.8 And, Remember, If Enough Questions for Peter During
this Presentation, Pick up the Phone.

P. Graves: Let\'s Get the Show On the Road. This Morning We\'re Going to
Concentrate on the Environmental Assessment Drafted for \"Far Beyond,\"
Which Is Located on Page 3.11 of Your Workbook, but Before We Go into
the Environmental Assessment, We Will Briefly Explain the Nepa Process
as it Relates to Filming On Public Land. Since this Is a Review for Most
Of You, Our Goal Is Not to Teach You How to Draft an Environmental
Assessment or Any Other Nepa Documentation. As You Know, Nepa Is Used
To, One, Determine If We Are in Conformance of Our Land Use Plans, Two,
to Develop Mitigation Measures for Identified Impacts, And, Three, To
Monitor the Activities after Permitting to Assure Compliance With the
Environmental Permitted Conditions. In Short, the Nepa Process Is
Intended to Help Public Officials Make Sound Decisions That Are Based on
the Understanding of Environmental Consequences and to Take Actions That
Protect, Restore and Enhance the Environment. Basically Nepa Requires
the BLM To Identify and Assess the Possible Impacts, Both Direct And
Indirect, to the Natural Resources by the Proposed Action And
Alternatives. To Do This, the BLM May Draft The Following Documents ‑‑
Environmental Impact Statements Environmental Assessments Administration
Determinations or What Are Now Called Determinations of Nepa Adequacy
And Category Exclusions. I Really Don\'t See an Office Doing an
Environmental Impact State for a Film. The Main One That Probably Most
Offices Would Do an Environmental Assessment. Now, These Documents Are
Just a Step down from an Environmental Impact Statements, but like in
Ridgecrest, We Have a Variety of Them, Such as for Programmatic
Environmental Assessments, and What We Could Use to Go to the Next
Category, Which Is Administrative Determinations Which Is a Tiering
Document. When You Tier to an Environmental Assessment, You Have to Have
Two Documents to Tier To. You Have to Have the General Document, and a
More Site Specific Document, Which Is Normally Your Ea, and the Category
Exclusions Are Actions That Either Individually or Cumulatively Do Not
Affect the Environment. So, Therefore, They\'re Excluded From the Ea or
Eia ‑‑ E.is Process.

M. von Koch: Peter, I Would Say over 90% of the Permits That We Do Do
Not Require the Preparation of an Ea. So We Do the Determination of Nepa
Compliance ‑‑ or Nepa Adequacy, I Should Say, or Dna, And We Tier to
Existing Environmental Assessments That Have Been Done in the past for
Specific Filming Locations, and An Example of a Dna Is Found on Page 3.6
of the Workbook. We Also Do a Large Number of Categorical Exclusions and
We Use Exclusion E‑19, Which States That for Short‑term Land
Authorization, If It\'s Going to Be Reclaimed, That it Does Meet That
Criteria. And We Do Have an Example of a Cx. It\'s on Page 3.3 of the
Workbook.

C. Calamaio: Mary, Perhaps You Guys Could Clarify a Little Bit, this
Concept of Plan Tiering Can Get a Little Complex Under Administrative
Determination. The Line Official in the Field Office, Then, in He Is
Sense Approving That Based on the Plan Tiering?

M. von Koch: What They Do Is The Specialist Who Prepares the Document
Goes Through the Existing Documents and There Are Certain Questions That
Trigger The Thought Process to Make Sure That the Document That You\'re
Tiering to Really Did Do an Adequate Job of Analysis and That the New
Proposal That You\'re Looking at Is Essentially The Same as the One That
Was Originally Analyzed, and So We Do That Determination That We Have an
Ea in Place That Is Adequate and Then the Decision Is to Go Ahead and
Issue a Film Permit and That Is Signed By, in Our Situation, It\'s the
Assistant Field Office Manager For the Division of Resources.

P. Graves: in Ours They\'re Signed off the by the Branch Chief, Field
Manager and by Our Nepa Coordinator. As You Remember, Chuck Submitted
The Plan of Development That Had Been Developed into the Proposed Action
as Outlined in the Ea Located on Page 3.11 of Your Workbook. When a
Proposed Action or Activity Is to Occur on the Public Land, We Conduct
an Interdisciplinary Team Review. This Team Reviews Environmental
Effects of the Proposed Action, And the Alternatives So That the
Relevant Environmental Information Is Available to Citizens and to the
Public Officials. The Team Should Consist of Staff Specialists in Your
Office and Should Include a Wildlife Biologist, a Natural Resource
Specialist an Archaeologist to Name a Few. The Team Reviews the Project
By, One, Going on Site Visits with Key Members with the Company And,
Two, Reviewing the Land Use Plan and Federal and State and Local Laws
and Regulations. Mary, How Do You Do Your Land Use Plan and How Does it
Relate To Your Filming?

M. von Koch: Well, All Authorizations must Be in Conformance with Your
Land Use Plan, but Remember That Your Land Use Plan Can Be the Basis To
Reject All or Part of a Proposal. For the Purpose of Documenting
Conformance in the \"Far Beyond\" Ea, Those Items in the Resource
Management Plan That Are Pertinent to Our Project Are Found on Page 3.9
of Your Workbook. Lan Conformance Was Documented In the Ea on Page 3.13.
Some of the Elements in Your Land Use Plan That You Should Consider for
Authorizations Are ‑‑ There Are Any Special Conditions And/or
Restrictions That Would Apply to Your Project? There Are Special Areas
and Designations That Need to Be Addressed? And Are There Special
Management Plans That Tier to the Land Use Plan? Peter, What Other
Conformance Issues Are There in this Nepa Process?

P. Graves: in Addition to Conformance of the Land Use Plan, We Also Have
to Conform to Applicable Federal, State and Local Laws and Regulations.
Such Laws and Regulations Include but Are Not Limited to ‑‑ the
Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, the Clean
Air Act, the Clean Water Act, Flpma, Title 43 Code of Federal
Regulations Part 2920, and Local Zoning Laws.

C. Calamaio: Peter, That\'s Quite an Impressive List of Legislative and
Regulatory Requirements. Do You Have Any Advice or Is There Anything
That\'s Key in Terms of the BLM Realty Specialist Being Able to Make
Sure They\'re in Compliance with All These Mandates?

P. Graves: Yes, We Have the Team Review That Reviews All Nepa Documents,
and the Good Thing about it Is this Team Obviously Consists of Wildlife
Biologists Who Would Be Familiar With the Endangered Species Act, The
Archaeologist Would Be Familiar with the National Historic Preservation
Act and The National Resource Specialist. So with the Combination, the
Joint Team Effort, All These Laws and Regulations Will Be Addressed and
Looked Into.

C. Calamaio: Mary, One of the Things Peter Mentioned Was Local Zoning
Regulations. Is this Something You Actually Do in Your Area in Terms Of,
Let\'s Say, Things Specific to The County You Are In?

M. von Koch: Yes in Our Office We Keep a Copy of the Plans for Both the
Grand County And San Juan County Because We Have Both Counties in Our
Jurisdiction, and When We Get to The Part in the Environmental
Assessment That Addresses Local Zoning, We Have to Actually Take An
Excerpt from One of Those Plans or Both as Actually Napped Our \"Far
Beyond\" Ea to Show That The Proposed Action Is Truly in Conformance
with Local Plans.

C. Calamaio: a Lot of Stuff To Keep Track Of.

P. Graves: Yes.

C. Calamaio: Peter, I Think You Have Some Words on Impacts?

P. Graves: Yes, I Do. The next Thing We Need to Review Are the Potential
Impacts from Proposed Action and Alternatives. We Need to Evaluate Both
Adverse And Positive Impacts from the Proposed Actions. Some of the
Adverse Impacts Include Surface Disturbance Activities, Staging
Activities, Visual, Limiting Public Access, And Vehicles, People and
Animals That May Be Driving Around or Walking Around the Set. The
Positive Impacts Include Economic Benefits. The Economic Impacts to Our
Communities That Result from Filming Is Something to Be Aware Of as You
Will Notice from Page 3.72 of Your Workbook. The Economic Benefits to a
Community Can Be Great. This Picture Shows That We Had About \$5.5
Million in 1998 Generated from Filming in Ridgecrest, for Those Who
Don\'t Know Ridgecrest, It\'s Kind of an Isolated Community Downsized by
Military, and Any Income We Get. When You Get \$5.5 Million it Helps a
Loft People out and Keeps Jobs. The Benefits Are Great. But Our Mandate
and Our Focus Is To Manage the Public Lands, We Have to Remember. Under
the Principles of Multiple Use and Sustained Yield and Not To Generate
Revenue. So We\'re Kind of on a Double‑edged Sword. We\'re Trying to
Help Our Communities but It\'s Not Our Primary Mission. Other Benefits
Include Benefits To the Resources. Basically Is the Land Better After
the Film Crew Leaves? This Is an Example from a Film Crew That Recently
Shot in Ridgecrest. This Is a Bunch of Glass and Other Debris That Was
in an Area That Spikes up Productions, or Better Known as Disney, Wanted
To Clean up So They Could Film The Picture \"Dinosaur\" Which Is Coming
out May 19th. As You Can Tell There Is Glass, Debris and Other Things
That Needed to Be Picked Up, and These Are Tires That Were Also There.
There Was Hundreds of Them. For Disney to Clean it up it Would Have Been
Quite Expensive, So They Reverted to Our Program, What We Have with One
of the Local I Schools, and They Asked A Local High School to Clean it
Up and So this next Picture Indicates the Students Cleaning Up the
Tires. This Was Also Benefit to the Students Because They Got to Be On a
Film Set and Get ‑‑ They Got to Meet Directors, Puppeteers, Special
Effects People. So They Maybe Have a New Job Down in the Future That
They Could Be Interested. And Then this next Picture Indicates All the
Tires That Were Removed from There. As You Can See, It\'s Pretty Many
And Because There Are So Many, Our Office Is Still Trying to Remove All
Those Tires and Slowly but Surely We\'re Going to Hopefully Take Them
All to the Dump Some Day, and the next Picture Is of the Area Where All
The Glass Was. As You Can Tell, It\'s Pretty Well Cleaned Up. Disney Had
Special Lenses That They Used That You Could See Any Little Flicker of
Glass, and After the Students Went Through The Area, You Couldn\'t See
That Very Much Anymore and What You Could See Could Be Taken out With
Computers. And the Final Shot Is of the Wide Area, and as You Can Tell,
There Are Absolutely No Tires or Anything Else. It\'s Totally Pristine,
and with This Cleanup, the Public Lands Are Now Cleaner and Now Other
Film Projects May Be Used There.

C. Calamaio: and Disney Paid For it All?

P. Graves: and Disney Paid For it All, Yes, They Did. As You Remember,
in the Ibla Decision Mary Spoke of Yesterday, it Was Noted That Positive
Impacts from Proposed Action Outweighed the Usual Environmental Impacts.
So That Is Something to Consider, Is the Land Going to Be Better after
the Film Crew Leaves. A Third Impact May Be Funding For BLM Projects.

C. Calamaio: What Would Be an Example of Something like That, Where
There\'s Something That We Have Kind of on Our Wish List We Want to Do
and Actually in Essence We Can Get Hollywood to Pay for It?

P. Graves: Yes, We Had a ‑‑ \"Dinosaur\" Again Came to Mind. We Had a
Place Called Robber\'s Roost. Basically I\'m Going to Get this Wrong,
but It\'s a National Registered Site or Could Be a National Register
Site and We Needed to Do Archaeological Review Before We Could Do That,
And When Disney Wanted to Film There, That Was One of the Requirements,
and They Did Some Archaeological Digs and We Got Some Very Good
Information from It, and If it Wasn\'t for That, That Never Would Have
Been Investigated and the Information Generated from it Would Never Have
Come to Fruition. So That Was Something That We Really Benefited from as
an Office and Probably as a Country.

C. Calamaio: So it Helped Our Cultural Resources.

P. Graves: and What Happened To the Crashing Ark and the Stampeding of
the 350 Horses?

M. von Koch: as You Recall, We Watched the Suspended Ark Yesterday, and
in the Ea That We Prepared for this Project, We Analyzed the Impacts to
the Environment as Follows ‑‑ For the Ark Sequence We Determined That
There Was the Potential for an Impact to Soils, and the Measure That We
Used, We Assumed That the Ark Would Land on a Slope and Slide 500 Feet,
Disturbing Approximately an Area 15 Feet Wide, Which Would Encompass
About .2 Acres. Because the Slope Had No Vegetation, We Did Not Consider
That to Be an Element of Great Importance. The Area Did Not Receive Much
Recreation Use, So We Did Not Include That Visually, We Weren\'t Sure
What Was Going to Happen When the Ark Came Crashing Down, and So We Made
The Assumption That the Ark Would Stay Intact and Would Leave a Scar on
the Slope That Would Be Visible for the Indefinite Future. I Think One
Thing I Would like To Point out Is in That Situations Where You Really
Don\'t Have Any Previous Knowledge, the Worst Case Scenario Is about the
Only Way That You Can Go. Because the Area Was Roadless And Had
Wilderness Characteristics, We Assumed That The Temporary Impacts to
Wilderness Values During Filming ‑‑ That There Would Be Temporary
Impacts and They Would Be in the Form of Decreased Solitude. So Now
Let\'s See What Actually Happened. Here\'s the Ark, Again. Going down
the Track. Airborne. And Crash! What You Can See ‑‑ I Think We\'re Going
to Be Seeing That Again. The Ark Did Not Remain Intact. It Disintegrated
on Impact, and As We Continue You\'ll See That It Actually ‑‑ All the
Debris Stayed in That One Area Where it Hit. It Did Not Remove Any of
the Layers of Rock below It.

P. Graves: How Was All That Cleaned Up? How Did They Get to That Spot?
It Looks Pretty Isolated.

M. von Koch: it Is Quite Isolated. Let Me Tell You this Location Was on
One of the Benches of Castle Rock That We\'ve Seen in The Past, and to
Have it Cleaned Up, We Had a Group of Students That Live in a Nearby
Community Of Castle Valley. It Was a 7th Day Adventist Academy. The
Students Came out and Prepared Sling Loads That Were Then Removed by
Helicopter and Were Taken to the Adventist Academy and They Did this for
The Reclamation Rights to the Materials. Ok. In the Case of the 350
Stampeding Horses, These Were The Impacts That We Analyzed in The Ea.
Again, We Assumed That There Would Be an Impact to Soils and Using the
Worst‑case Scenario And the Fact the Company Had Identified That They
Would Be Using 100 Acres, We Made the Assumption That They Would Disturb
the 100 Acres, and this Would Result in an Increase in Erosion Problems.
Visually, Because Vegetation Would Be Destroyed, and There Would Be a
Difference During the Time That it Would ‑‑ for Revegetation, We Would
Have a Visual Contrast in That Area. For Livestock Grazing, We Foresaw
That There Would Be a Decrease in the Available Forge Equivalent to 5
Aums and I Can\'t Remember What Percentage That Was of the Allocation,
and That Would Continue for a Period of Five to Ten Years. And Obviously
Vegetation Was Very ‑‑ an Environmental Element That Would Be Impacted
Adversely. Uprooting of Vegetation on 100 Acres, Again, We Assumed That
All the Vegetation on That Whole Area Would Be Removed. And Then for
Five Years after Reseeding We Would First See Invader Species and That
the Establishment of Perennial Vegetation Was Not Expected for Five to
Ten Years. And Even ‑‑ and it Was Not a Wilderness Area. So Those Were
the Impacts That We Foresaw. Can We See the Video Now and See What
Actually Happened? Here We Have the Horses. The Company Had Not Told Us
How Many Passes They Would Take, and Actually They Ran Through and Were
Walked Back Ten Times.

C. Calamaio: this Is Footage That You Shot, Mary?

M. von Koch: this Is Footage I Shot. What Can You See in the Foreground
Is this Snowdrift Fence and That Was a Technique We Had Not Been Told
about at The Onset of the Project, and So The Horses Were Run Between
That Snowdrift Fence and the Cliff, And So the Actual Area That Was
Impacted Was about Six Acres, But as You\'ll See Shortly Here, Those Six
Acres Were Totally Destroyed. I Mean, There Wasn\'t Any Rooted
Vegetation in That Area. And One of the Things That this Did Allow Us Is
it Gave Us a Basis for Any Future Proposals Where Stampede Scenes Are
Suggested. At this Point I Had Never Worked On a Stampede of 350 Wild
Horses, and We Really Did Not Know What the Impacts Were Going To Be.

C. Calamaio: So Those Last Images, That Was Immediately After? It\'s
Just Gone.

M. von Koch: There Was Nothing There. And the Other Thing Was That, And
We\'ll Talk about this with Reclamation, While They Were Stampeding the
Horses Between Takes, They Had a Water Truck That Would Come Through and
‑‑ So They Wouldn\'t ‑‑ What They Ended up with ‑‑ They Wanted Some
Dust, but There Was So Much Dust That They Couldn\'t See the Buck Board,
Which Was Part of The Scene. Billy Crystal and His Friends Were All
Supposed to Be in the Buckboard and Completely Surrounded by the Horses,
and it Kicked up So Much Dust You Couldn\'t See the Buckboard and So
They Had to Take it over and Over. But the Effect of this Water on This
Soil Which Has Some Clay in It Was That We Had about Six Acres of Cement
Throughout after They Were Finished.

P. Graves: So You\'re Still Going out There and Monitoring And Seeing
How the Growth Is Going?

M. von Koch: You Will Have to Stay Tuned this Afternoon for The Answer
to the Question. That\'s Basically it for Exercise Number 3.

C. Calamaio: to Sort of Summarize the Homework, Is There A Lesson Here
for the Layperson Looking at Those Two Film Clips, Seeing this
8,000‑pound Ark Flying off the Cliff, There May Be an Assumption That\'s
Going to Have the Biggest Impact, Something like That Gouging into The
Ground, When in Reality Is Maybe ‑‑ Simply Running Those Horses Back and
Forth Did Far More Damage.

M. von Koch: Yes, it Had the Greater Impact, Most Definitely.

C. Calamaio: Peter?

P. Graves: with All That Activity and the Stunts Involved In Those Two
Film Clips, We Should Now Discuss Other Issues That Are Associated with
the Proposed Project. For Safety. As You May Recall, in the Proposed
Action in Far Beyond Consisted of Burning of a Barn. Since the Company
Plans to Use Pyrotechnics or Explosives, Fire Suppression Should Be
Examined. Both Rangers and Fire Crew Should Meet with the Special
Effects Crew to Discuss the Usage of Pyrotechnics or Explosives. Once
Again, You May Need to Contact Other Law Enforcement Agencies, Air
Quality Agencies And Local Communities Before Authorizing the Permit.

C. Calamaio: Ok. Would the Special Effects Crews Need to Provide
Anything to Our Wild Land Fire People Regarding Potential Fire Dangers,
Haz‑mat Issues, Things like That?

P. Graves: Yes, Chip, Our Fire Management Officer Usually Requires the
Pyrotechnic Team or Special Effects Team to Submit Things Such as
Licenses, the List of Amounts, a List of Materials to ‑‑ He Plans to
Use, References and Resumes, and If We Ever Have Any Questions Regarding
What They Submitted, We Have the Naval Air Weapons Station next Us to
That We Can Ask Their Ordnance Explosive Teams What They Are and They
Will Assist Us Anyway They Can.

C. Calamaio: I Would Imagine Some of Our Staff in Another Office Can
Probably Contact Our National Fire Center in Boise For Some Guidance on
Things like That?

P. Graves: I Would Assume So, Yes. In One Instance, the Film Company
Thought the Expense of a Fire Crew Was Unjustified, but When They Heard
If That They Caused a Fire on Public Land They Would Be Responsible for
All the Damage, Which Could Run In the Millions, Then They Were More
Agreeable to Having a Fire Crew on Site. Look at this next Group of
Pictures and I Will Let You Decide If a Fire Crew Should Have Been
Present or Not. This Is a Cabin That the Crew ‑‑ The Film Crew Built.
It\'s Supposed to Represent the Stereotypical Meth Lab Somewhere In the
Middle of the Desert All By Itself. And Then When Our Hero Came Along,
and with a ‑‑ Who Is the Sheriff of the County, He Came Along and with a
Single Shotgun Shot Blew it Up. There We Go. The Single Shot, He Blew up
the Meth Lab and Rid the Public of The Drug Pushers, and as You Can
Tell, it Was Pretty Extensive Fire. Now, this Crew Was Saying to Me They
Are Going to Call Senator Boxter or Senator Firestein and Say They
Didn\'t Need the Fire Crew. But as Can You Tell, They Probably Should
Have Had One There. Another Crew Challenged the Need For a Fire Crew.
Recently Also. This Is a ‑‑ the Music Video for Jake Andrews, a Song
Called \"Time to Burn.\" The Company\'s Propane Hoses Caught on Fire and
Luckily Our Fire Crew Was There to Put the Fire Out. If They Were Not
There, Many People Could Have Been Seriously Injured or Killed. In
Ridgecrest, Any Time Pyrotechnics Are Used, the Fire Crew Is on Site and
the Company Is Required to Submit All the Costs of the Fire Crew.
Another Issue Is Security for Equipment Left Overnight on Site And to
the General Public During Stunts. We Have to Remember That We Normally
Cannot Authorize Exclusive Use of the Public Lands. And with That, I
Would like to Mention One Thing about the Censorship Issue That Mary
Talked about Yesterday, and That Is, We Cannot Place a Value Judgment on
the Activities Being Filmed. The Only Judgments We Can Make Are Those
That Relate to the Activities and Their Effects on Natural Resources.
But What We Can Require Is Them To Put up Privacy Shields or Screening
to Conceal What ‑‑ to Conceal Any Kind of Objectionable or Unsuitable
Material People Might Find. Another Issue with Regard to Safety Is the
Use of Animal Actors, as You Saw in the \"City Slickers Two\" Film Shot
That Mary Showed. If the Proposed Activity Will Include Animals, the
American Humane Society Should Be Present At Any Time an Animal Is on
Set Or in the Staging Areas. The Humane Society Will Monitor Feed,
Water, Shade, Rest and So Forth to Ensure That the Animals Will Not Be
Harmed or Injured as A Result of Filming Activities. And Keep in Mind
That ‑‑ They Also Have Jurisdiction over All Animals, Including Pets.
Mary, for \"City Slickers Two\" Did You Require Some Kind of Special
Feed for the Horses?

M. von Koch: Actually We Have A Stipulation That We Use in Our Office
Any Time That We Have Horses and Livestock on Location, and What the
Requirement Is, for Two Days Before the Animals Are Brought Into Our
Area, They must Be Fed Nongerminating Pellets or Weed‑free Hay, and Then
When They Were on Location, Either of Those Two Options Would Also
Apply. We Do Have a Problem with Noxious Weeds That\'s the Reason We
Have the Requirement.

C. Calamaio: in Terms That Stunt with the Stampeding Horses, What about
the Stress to The Animals in Terms of Repeatedly Doing That Effect Ten
Times? Was That Monitored?

M. von Koch: Yes, There Was a Representative of the Humane Society on
Location, and the Person Took Copious Notes, and I Don\'t Think That
There Was a Situation That Violated Whatever Their Parameters Are for
Mistreatment of Animals.

P. Graves: at the End of the Movie, You Will See Their Stamp Of
Approval, Their Passing Grade, That No Animals Were Injured or Harmed as
a Result of The Filming Activities, and the Only Way They Can Get That
Approval Is If They Pass the Muster, So to Speak, with the American
Humane Society.

M. von Koch: I Would like to Interject One More Thing. The Horses They
Used Were All Wild Horses That Were Rounded Up, I Think, in Arizona and
New Mexico, and I Think That Those Horses Had the Best Feeding While
They Were on Set That They\'d Had in Their Entire Lives.

C. Calamaio: Peter, I Think You\'re about Ready to Get into Alternatives
and We Did Get a Fax in from the Utah State Office from Joe, and Joe,
I\'m Going to Wait until Peter Finishes His Initial Presentation on
Alternatives and We\'ll Address Your Question.

P. Graves: Now, since We Talked about the Proposed Action And the
Impacts from the Proposed Action, It\'s Now Time To Discuss Some of the
Alternatives. The Only Alternative That Was Really Addressed in the Ea
for \"Far Beyond\" Was Knot Action Alternative. Now, with We Do the No
Action Alternative, Basically We\'re Saying We Are Going to Remain
Status Quo, Not Do Anything Different, We\'re Just Going to Say
Basically Deny the Permit And Send Them to Barstow or Yuma Or Anywhere
Else out of Our Area So We Don\'t Have to Deal with Them. One of the
Better Things to Do And One of the Things We Really Should Do Is Select
Other Locations. The Company for \"Far Beyond\" Has Not Identified
Alternative Locations for the Proposed Action, but this Still Should Be
Done in the Environmental Assessment. What Areas and Private Land or
Non‑ BLM Land Resemble or Fit the Look of the Proposed Action? Just
Because the Company Cannot Or Has Not Suggested Alternative Locations
Does Not Mean We Are Precluded from Developing or Identifying Them in
the Environmental Assessment.

C. Calamaio: Joe Asked Alternatives to the Proposed Action, Do
Alternatives Serve as A Viable Second Choice in Case The Proponent\'s
First Choice Is Denied? If So, Is the Site Specific Alternative Fully
Analyzed for Impacts and Would the Alternative Be Ready to Be
Implemented?

P. Graves: Yes, in the Environmental Assessment You Analyze Both. You
Analyze the Impacts to the Proposed Action up and Analyze The Impacts to
the Alternatives, And So If ‑‑ So the Proposed Action Is Not Going to
Gain Favor with Anybody and You Select like Alternative B, Then
Alternative B Will Have Been Analyzed and Impacts Addressed And
Mitigation Measures, Which We Will Talk about Later, Will Have Been
Addressed.

M. von Koch: There Is Another Alternative to Alternatives, but That Is
If the Company Still Wants to Get, You Know, a Particular Look in an
Area and Say That the Problem Is That Their Proposal Would Not Meet
Minimum Impact Criteria on BLM Lands, You Know, We Can Suggest That the
Company Look at Locations on State Trust Lands Or Private Lands Which
Would Keep Them Still in the Same General Area and Possibly Then Meet
the Time Frames Thereafter. ‑‑ That They\'re After.

C. Calamaio: We Get G‑d‑get a Fax from Natalie up Upstairs With the
Lands School about Monitoring, and We Got this and We Will Get into
Monitoring Extensively in One of the Segments this Afternoon and If That
Doesn\'t Answer Your Questions, We\'ll Talk to You Later on as We Go
Through. Peter, I Think You Have Some Thoughts on Cumulative Impacts.

P. Graves: Yes. Another Thing to Review Are the Cumulative Impacts That
May Result from the Proposed Action On Alternatives. There Is an Example
in Your Workbook on Page 3.28. Cumulative Impact Is Defined as The
Impact on the Environment Which Is ‑‑ Results From, One, The Incremental
Impact of the Action When Added to the Past, Present and Foreseeable
Actions And, Two, Cumulative Impacts Can Result from the Individually
Minor but Collectively Significant Actions Taking Place Over Time. Now,
since We Have Addressed the Potential Impacts with the Proposed Action
and Alternatives, it Is Time to Develop Mitigation Measures That Will
Either Lessen or Prevent Those Impacts. For Those of You Interested in
The Definition of Mitigation, it Can Be Found in Title 40, Cfr 1508.20.
The Definition Includes, One, Avoiding the Impact Altogether By Not
Taking a Certain Action Or Part of an Action. Two, Minimizing Impacts by
Limiting the Degree or Magnitude Of the Action and its Implementation.
Three, Rectifying the Impact by Repairing, Rehabilitating or Restoring
the Affected Environment. Four, Reducing or Eliminating The Impact over
Time by Preservation and Maintenance Operations During the Life of The
Action. And, Five, Compensation for the Impact by Replacing or Providing
Substitute Resource or Environments. Next We\'re Going to Talk about The
Mitigation Example for \"Far Beyond,\" Which You All Looked at Last
Night. Again, this Is Found on Page 3.26 of Your Workbook. Mary, Would
You like to Cover This?

M. von Koch: Certainly. I Think in Our \"Far Beyond\" Example We ‑‑ the
Bighorn Sheep Section Gives Us Some Good Talking Points and What I\'d
like To Mention Is That in the Processing of an Environmental
Assessment, Especially When You\'re Dealing with an Interdisciplinary
Team, Your Wildlife Biologist in this Case Will Be Seeing the Project
from A Viewpoint of Protecting a Particular Resource, and in the
Situation with \"Far Beyond\" and The Impacts to Bighorn Sheep, it Was
Determined by the Wildlife Biologist That the Bighorn Sheep Would Be
Definitely Impacted by The Proposed Action, Especially Because There Was
a Pond in the Area next to the Proposed Staging ‑‑ Primary Staging Area,
And If the Bighorn Sheep Did Not Come and Water in That Pond, They Would
Be Adversely Impacted. The Division of Wildlife Resources Had Submitted
Comments During the Public Comment Period, and They Had Recommended That
the BLM Require the Filming Company to Provide Monies to Construct Water
Catchment, and The BLM Wildlife Biologist, Knowing That Particular
Bighorn Sheep Herd and Their Patterns Had Determined That the Bighorn
Sheep Would Not Actually Use the Water Catchment but Would Continue
Wanting to Come to the Pond and So His Recommended Mitigation Was Not to
Construct The Water Catchment but to Have The Company Stage Away from
the Pond So That the Bighorn Sheep Would Continue to Use Their
Traditional Watering Area. And the Reason That I Bring this Up Is That
in the Ea, We Did Document All of These Different Viewpoints, and this
Would Then Allow in the Decision Making Process, Which We\'ll Talk about
Later, a Decision as to Which Kind of Mitigation You Would Actually Use
and Provide the Rationale Why or Why Not You Went Ahead with That
Mitigation.

P. Graves: I Hate to Be the Bearer of Bad News, but Now It\'s Time for
Your First Assignment Of the Day Which Can Be Found on Page 3.75. I
Would like to You Write Stipulations Based on the Mitigated Measures
Identified in The Environmental Assessment for \"Far Beyond.\" Chip?

C. Calamaio: Thanks, Peter. Well, You\'ve Got Your Assignment. At this
Point We\'re Going to Take That 20‑minute Break So Can You Complete the
Stipulations Exercise, and When We Come Back, We\'re Going to Hear from
Our Lands Class in Phoenix and Also Fillmore, Utah and Those Sites Are
Going to Call in with One Stipulation Each. So to Our Friends Upstairs
and Our Friends in Fillmore, Please Start Placing Your Calls about Five
Minutes Before We Pick Things up Again. See You in 20 Minutes.

C. Calamaio: I Thought ‑‑ No, I Thought You Were with Dysphunctional
Working on That \"Far Beyond\" Feature Thing. You What? A Hum‑vee?
You\'re ‑‑ You Got to Be Kidding Me? A Kia? Chuck ‑‑ I Got Ago. Welcome
Back to Our Film Permit Training Course. Once Again Joining Our
Instructional Team Is Leigh von Der Esch, Executive Director of The Utah
Film Commission. Hi, Leigh.

L. von Der Esch: Nice to Be With All of You Again, Mary and Peter. I
Don\'t Know, Your ‑‑ Stick with Producing. Actually, this Morning I
Would Like to Say Hello. I Understand There Are a Couple Film
Commissioners Throughout Watching from Wyoming, Michelle Falen and I
Think Shirley Davis, And Some Others from California. I\'m Happy to Know
They\'re Listening and I\'m Sure They\'ll Keep Me Honest after the
Broadcast.

C. Calamaio: That\'s Exciting They\'re Watching and If You Guys At All
Want to Call in and Give Us Some Perspectives from Your States, Please
Feel Free to Do So. That\'s Exciting. We\'re Anxious to See What Some Of
Have You Come up with Regarding the Stips for the Decision Document,
That Exercise That Peter Gave You Before the Break and We\'re Going to
Start With Nancy in Fillmore. Hello, Nancy.

Caller: Hi. How Are You?

C. Calamaio: What Did You Guys Come up with for the Answers to That
Exercise?

Caller: Well, I\'m One of Those Big Proponents for Protecting and
Enhancing and Restoring, So One of the Stipulations I Would like to See
In There Is for the Soil Protection and Reseeding of That Disturbed
Areas.

C. Calamaio: Mary, How Does That Fit?

M. von Koch: Well, Basically I Went Through the Environmental Assessment
and Through the Mitigating Measures and Found That There Were 12
Mitigating Measures That Would Lead to Enforceable Stipulations, and on
Page 8 of the Document, Just as Shorthand Measure Here, I Have That the
Reclamation Measures Identified for Mitigation Would Become
Stipulations, and Rather Than Spelling it All out Again, I Just Have it
as a Shorthand, But That Would Definitely Be an Enforceable Stipulation.
Thank You.

C. Calamaio: Thanks a Lot, Nancy.

Caller: Welcome. Appreciate It.

C. Calamaio: Now to Our Lands Academy Upstairs, Wendy Is on The Line.

Caller: I Have a Question ‑‑

C. Calamaio: Hi, Wendy. Go Ahead with Your Question, Please.

Caller: Ok. The Question Is Regarding Stipulations. We Know That BLM Has
Horse Gatherers and Going Back to the Horse Scene, Could We Not Consult
with Wild Horse and Burro Specialists and Obtain Information How They
Minimize Aggravation When They Do the Horse Gathers and Wouldn\'t That
Be Helpful in Writing the Stipulation?

M. von Koch: I Think That Would Be an Excellent Source of Information.
We Did Not Use That Source for City Slickers, but I Think for Future
Reference, That Would Be A Really Good Way to Do It. We Do Have Several
States and Offices That Do Have the Wild Horse Gathers Periodically, and
I Think That\'s an Excellent Suggestion. But since We Have You On,
Wendy, Did You Go Through the Mitigating Measures in the \"Far Beyond\"
Ea and Come up with an Enforceable Stipulation?

Caller: We Faxed it In.

C. Calamaio: Let\'s See If We Have That Fax. Yes, Here it Is. I Would
like to Pass this to Mary. Mary, Also We Have One from Fairbanks from
Alaska, and They Also Have Given Us the Stipulations They Came up With.

M. von Koch: Ok.

C. Calamaio: Let\'s See If We Can Take a Look at That.

M. von Koch: I Think I Need To Share this with Everybody Who Is Watching
Today. We Have What They Call a Resourceful Group of People in The Lands
Academy and What They Did, Rather than Writing out a Couple of
Stipulations, They Sent Us a Full List of All the Stipulations That We
Had Further On in Your Workbook That We Had Considered for Attachment to
the Permit. So Not Only Did They Answer One Stipulation, but All 12 That
I Had Identified.

C. Calamaio: They\'ve Been Busy.

M. von Koch: Right. Basically What That Leads Me to Is for the Rest of
the People Who Completed this Exercise, If You Also Will Go to ‑‑ Let\'s
See. I Don\'t Remember Which Page Number That Is. Page 3.83 in Your
Workbook as The Lands Academy People Did, And You Can Then Check on Your
Own Whether the Stipulations That You Came up with Were the Same That We
Had Identified in Writing the Environmental Assessment and the ‑‑ Just
the Permit That Follows. One Thing I Do Want to Add, and That Is That in
the Mitigation For Wildlife Where One of the Mitigating Measures That
Was Identified Was to Require the Company to Pay for Monitoring of
Bighorn Sheep, That Is Not an Enforceable Stipulation. We Cannot Require
That the Company Do That as a Term of Their Permit. We Can Identify That
Need and The Company May Choose to Help Us in That Way, but That Would
Not Be an Enforceable Stipulation.

C. Calamaio: Thank You, Mary. This Is from Susan, Shirley, Frank, Susan,
Sandy and Janet, Another Answer to That Question. I Think Maybe Mary
During Our Lunch Hour You May Want to Look Those Over, and While We\'re
Having Lunch, Maybe If You See Anything You Want to Comment On, We Can
Do That in the Last Half.

M. von Koch: I Think That\'s a Good Idea.

C. Calamaio: a Bunch of Faxes Have Come In. We Want to Talk to You about
These. We Have a Very Lengthy Fax from Suzanne in Prineville, and it Was
Concerning Federal Aviation Regulations Part 71 Subchapter E Involving
Airspace. What Suzanne Is Telling Us Is We May Have Been Erroneous in
Some Of Our Comments We Made about Airspace, and She Sent Us a Very
Detailed Copy from the Faa Regulations and I Think What We Would like to
Do, If You Can, Suzanne, to Help Us Interpret This Within the Time
Available, Why Don\'t You Give Us a Call, And If Could You Help Clarify
The Portion of What We Said That Was Incorrect and I Am Going to Pass
this down to Peter, and We Also Will Review That at Lunch, And If You
Give Us a Call Sometime During Today\'s Broadcast, We\'ll Try to Clarify
That. We Got a Call from Candy, I Believe It\'s in Idaho, I Believe The
Idaho State Office, and She Wants to Know, What Can We Do About the
Truck and Suv Commercials That Show or Depict How Their Vehicles Can Go
Anywhere. The Vehicles Are Covered with Mud ‑‑ These Commercials Lead
The Viewers to Believe this Kind Of off Road Vehicle Use Is Ok. So
We\'re Talking about a Natural Resource Impact Issue Here. Leigh, Do You
Have a Thought on That?

L. von Der Esch: That\'s an Interesting Question I Was Asked Recently
When I Spoke to a Group Of People Who Were Environmentally Concerned
about Filming, and I Think the Difficult Part Is the Age of the Digital
World. There\'s Confusion out There That Actually What Is Being Filmed
on Public Lands Is, in Fact, Occurring Because They\'re Digitally
Creating a Lot of the Activity. There Was a Recent Product Where A
Vehicle Was Used and Two People Were Throwing a Frisbee To Each Other.
That Was Digitally Created. There Was an Hmo Commercial That They Shot
on Two Sides of the Can Annual and Four People Were Presumably in a
Convertible, and It Jumped from One Side of the Canyon to the Other, and
That Was Digitally Created. As Far as Our Office Goes, We Have Tried to
Back up All the Land Managers to the Best of Our Ability in Terms of
Certainly Not Supporting What May Be Contrary to What You Want to Do. We
Have to Ask, Though, That\'s Our Job, and I Think It\'s Very Difficult
for a Production Company to Not Be Able to Show a Vehicle as It\'s Used
Because, of Course, Vehicles Are Being Used In That Way. Mary, Maybe You
Have Some Perspective on That. Obviously You\'re Not Going to Let Them
Do on Public Lands Something That Can\'t Be Done, But in Point of Fact,
Off‑road Vehicles Are Used off Road.

M. von Koch: I\'m Glad You Brought That Up, Because We Don\'t Allow, in
Some Areas Where We Have the Designation for a Use Only of Existing
Roads and Trails, for the Vehicles to Go Off Roads and Trails,
Especially For the Purpose of Filming a Commercial. But What I Would
like to Mention Is That Recently, or ‑‑ and That\'s in the Last Two or
Three Years, Several of the Car Companies When They Come into to Do
Their Commercials, They Have Internal Policy Within Their Companies That
They Will Not Show a Vehicle off Road, and I Know Toyota Is One, and I
Can\'t Remember Which Other Companies Do That as Well. But They Have
Recognized this Is A Problem, and Some of the Companies Have Decided
That They\'re Not Going to Show Vehicles off Roads.

L. von Der Esch: That\'s a Good Point, Chip, Because the Association of
Independent Commercial Producers Who I Have Worked with in the Past,
They Actually Have an Environmental Checklist Which the Advertising
Agencies Have Agreed to Work With the Commercial Production Agencies and
this May Be Another Stipulation They Add to Their Own Environmental
Sensitivity, Because They Are Trying to Be More Responsible. It\'s a
Problem. It\'s Going to Be ‑‑ Continue to Be a Problem with the Digital
World, Not with What We\'re Doing.

C. Calamaio: Thank You All. I Can See this Is One of the Issues Where
Perceptions Become Reality. It\'s Exciting It\'s Being Addressed. Candy,
That\'s a Great Question. The Voices in My Ear Are Telling Me We Need to
Move along to Keep On Track. We Do Have a Bunch of Excellent Questions
That Have Come in and We Are Going to Hold Some of Those until One of
Our Formal Question and Answer Segments a Little Later. Right Now We\'re
Ready to Move Onto the next Phase of Our Training, the Nepa Process. The
Decision Record. I Believe, Peter, You Are Going To Get this Started.

P. Graves: Yes, I Will. The Decision That Is Going to Be Issued to
Dysphunctional Films Can Be Found on Page 3.63 of Your Workbook. The BLM
Had Decided to Issue the Permit as Proposed. Mary, What Happens If the
BLM Decides to Only Issue Part of The Permit? Can We Still Do That or Do
We Have to Issue the Whole Permit As Proposed?

M. von Koch: I Have a Case in Point That Shows That You Can Do A Partial
Decision. Not Too Long Ago We Had a Proposal for a Company That Wanted
to Do Some Filming Shots Of Castle Rock, Which You See on Your Screen
Right Now. What They Wanted to Do Was Establish That this Part of the
Movie Was Going to Take Place on Castle Rock. They Were Particularly
Interested in the Shape That You See and the Elevation Difference In the
Pinnacle Itself to Be Able to Accomplish What They Call the Falling
Stunt and in The Purpose and Need for this Project, They Identified That
They Needed Approximately Six Days to Do the Filming at Castle Rock to
Establish That That Was The Actual Location Where They Were Going to Be
‑‑ Where the Climbing Sequence Was Taking Place. In Addition to That,
They Identified a Need for a Pinnacle Called the Rectory in the Same
General Area to Do the Falling Stunt, and That Was Going to Require
Something like 46 Days Of Helicopter Use Going Back and Forth to Put the
Rigging in Place, to Rehearse the People Doing the Stunt, to Film Stunt,
And Then Doing the Cleanup Afterwards. The Thing Was That Castle Rock
And the Rectory Are in Close Proximity to a Residential Area Called
Castle Valley That Has About 500 Residents, and These People Live about
20 Miles Away From Moab, and There\'s a Reason Why They\'re There. They
Really like the Solitude And the Idea of Having These Helicopters Going
Back and Forth For about Two Months Was a Little Bit More than They
Could Stand. And We Put out the Environmental Assessment for Public
Comment, We Got a Very Great Response From the Residents That this Was
Objectionable. When We Went Back and Evaluated The Public Comments, Not
from The Standpoint of Counting Votes, You Know, That Kind of Thing, but
What the True Impacts Were and What Was Necessary, We Decided That Stab
‑‑ That the Purpose and Need of Establishing The Location on Castle Rock
Could Be Accomplished with Six Days of Filming and That They Could Use
Another Location in a Less Intrusive Place to Do the Falling Stunt, and
So Our Decision, Peter, in Answer to Your Question after All this Is
That We Did a Partial Decision. We Told Them That They Could Film There
for Six Days, and They\'d Have to Find Another Place to Do the Stunt.

P. Graves: So like You Were Up Front with the Company, Didn\'t Have Any
Surprises Like, They\'re ‑‑ They\'ve Already Submitted the Application,
You Already Told Them up Front this Could Be a Problem ‑‑

M. von Koch: They Minute They Mentioned They Wanted to Do this In That
Area, from past Experience, I Suggested Other Pinnacles That They Might
Use, Other Places Where They Could Do The Falling Stunt, and They
Refused to Look at Other Locations. What They Did Do Was Reduce the
Number of Filming Days ‑‑ Or, Not Filming Days, Helicopter Use Days to
Try and Make this a Little Bit More Palatable, but It Still Wasn\'t. The
Numbers I Gave You Were the Revised Version.

C. Calamaio: I Think this Takes Us into Our next Topic, Peter, Appeals.

P. Graves: Yes, \"Far Beyond\" Is Not an Example of a Memo ‑‑ Minimum
Impact Film Permit So The Decision Is Not Full Force And Effect as You
Learned about Yesterday. Therefore, Weaver to Afford a 30‑day Appeal
Period Prior to Issuing Their Permit. An Adverse Party Has Appeal Rights
to the Ibla in According To Title 43 Cfr 4.4. They Can Request a Stay
and the Ibla Has 45 Days at the Expiration of the 30 Days to Grant the
Stay. Basically after the Time Period Of the Appeal Expires, Which Is 30
Days, the Ibla Has 45 Days to Whether or Not to Issue the Grant ‑‑ or
the Stay. If No Decision Is Issued Within The 45 Days, Theoretically the
Stay Is Denied and the Shooting Can Commence. However, If the Stay Is
Granted By the Ibla, the BLM Loses Jurisdiction on the Case. Now,
Because If a Stay Is Granted by the Ibla and We Lose Jurisdiction, We
Have to Make Sure Our Files Are Organized and Complete. The Ibla Does
Not like Sloppy Files. The BLM Has Been Chastised and Basically
Penalized in the past By the Ibla for Having Very Messy and Disorganized
Files. We Also Have to Remember the Freedom of Information Act. Under
That, People Can Come in And Request to Look at Our Files, and We Want
to Be Very Professional ‑‑ it Won\'t Be Professional If We Have
Disorganized and Sloppy Files. Also the Media, When We Had the Accident
in Ridgecrest on the Disney Set, the First Thing the Media Wanted to Do
Was Examine The Files, Look at the Permit And Get Ahold of Everything So
They Knew What Was Authorized And What Wasn\'t Authorized.

C. Calamaio: Well, We Set Aside Some Time at this Point to Take
Additional Questions You Might Have on the Nepa Process Or the Decision
Process. So If You Need Some Clarification, Give Us a Call About What
Peter and Mary Have Just Presented and We Are Going To Get into These
Faxes. But Before We Take Our First Question, Mary, I Was Wondering,
Based on Your Experience in Moab, Just How High Is the Risk Of Having an
Appeal Filed?

M. von Koch: Actually It\'s Not Very High. Out of 450 Permits That
We\'ve Issued in Our Office since 1983, Only Two of These Have Been
Appealed, and One of Them Was \"City Slickers,\" That Famous Ark We Have
Been Seeing, and What Happened There, the Decision to Issue the Film
Permit Was Appealed by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, but it Was
Overruled When the Secretary of The Department of Interior Went Ahead
and Signed the Permit. The Other Situation Was with the Filming in a
Wilderness Study Area. I Was Attempting to Write a Programmatic
Environmental Assessment, and in So Doing Establish Some Thresholds for
Minimum Impact for Filming in West Water Canyon of the Colorado River,
and the Decision Of Ibla Was That We Could Not Do This Programmatically
in a Wilderness Study Area, That We Had to Afford the Public a 30‑day
Notification Period on a Project‑by‑project Basis.

C. Calamaio: There Really Is The Potential Once Something Gets to Ibla
They Are Going to Rule on It, That We\'re Talking About an Indefinite
Period of Time by Film Company Standards, Right?

M. von Koch: Most Definitely. I Think That the Company Would Either Have
Dissolved or the Project Would Be Gone Before We Would Have a Ruling by
Ibla.

C. Calamaio: 27 to 28 Months For the Ibla to Get a Decision. That\'s an
Average Right Now.

L. von Der Esch: It\'s Too Long for a Production Company, And to Mary\'s
Credit and I Think The Reason Why She Hasn\'t Had Too Many Appeals ‑‑
Too Many, Two ‑‑ Is Because She Has Done a Thorough Permitting Process,
and That Has Protected Her. Now, I Think the Proposed Wilderness Areas
Are the Ones Where You\'re a Little Bit Touchier in Terms of Whether or
Not You Will Get an Appeal. When the Land Is Clearly Designated and You
Do a Thorough Nepa Process, You Have Protected Yourself and We Have Not
Seen an Appeal.

C. Calamaio: Keeping along With this Utah Theme, We Do Have A Fax from
Max Seen in Monticello Regarding the Ark in The City Slicker 2 Stunts
and Wanted to Know If There Were Repercussions from the Public After
That Was Filmed and If You Would Allow That Type of Action Again and
What Did You Learn From Those Projects That Helped You in the Future
Deciding What To Allow, How to Mitigate, Cut, Analyze and Permit Them?

M. von Koch: That\'s a Great Question. Hi, Maxine. I Would Say That the
Repercussions on the Ark Were Rather Amazing. I Was at a Meeting, and We
Were Actually up at Dead Horse Point State Park, That\'s Where We Ended
up Showing the Videotape, And the Representative at That Time from the
Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance Was with Us, And I Showed What the
Actual Impacts Were to the Site That You\'ve Just Seen Today and People
Were Really Pretty Amazed That for Some ‑‑ a Proposal That Had Been So
Very Controversial ‑‑ I Mean, We Had People Who Were Going to Climb
Castle Rock In Bright like Raw Clothing to Protest the Film Yeah in That
Area and it Was Only the Bad Weather in November That I Think Kept Them
from Doing That. Just to Answer the Question, Having Videotaped What the
Actual Impact Was and Being Able To Show to That a Group of People
Really Did Help to Show That There Really Was Not Much Of an Impact. As
Far as \"City Slickers,\" I Think That Is a Really Good Test Case for
the Very Long Term Disturbance to the Public Lands. \"City Slickers\"
Was Filmed in 1993. It\'s Now the Year 2000 and We\'re Just Starting to
See Some Perennial Vegetation Becoming Established at That Site, and We
Will Be Talking about That this Afternoon with Reclamation. There\'s
Definitely a Lot to Be Learned in the Environmental Assessment Process
in Going Back At the End and Seeing How We Did In Predicting the
Impacts, How We Did in Coming up with Suitable Stipulations, and Then
Using That in the Future for Other Projects, and it Does ‑‑ Once You\'ve
Established this Database, Then You Have Someway Of Evaluating Future
Projects.

C. Calamaio: That\'s Great. Hey, We Have a Call, Rene in Butte in on the
Line. Do You Have a Question for Us?

Caller: Yes, I Have a Couple. One Is about the 30‑day Appeal Period
Versus the 45‑day Stay. Would You Recommend Going Ahead And Issuing the
Permit after the 30‑day Appeal Period Is over ‑‑ Well, I Guess You\'ve
Already Got An Appeal. So Would You ‑‑ You Would Wait The Full 45 Days
Before You Issued the Permit If You Didn\'t Hear Back about the Stay?

M. von Koch: If You ‑‑ If You Went Through the 30‑day Appeal Period and
Your Decision Was, Indeed, Appealed, Then You Have To Wait the 45‑day
Period to ‑‑ Well, I Guess ‑‑ with the Appeal You Would Know Whether
They Requested a Stay, and You Should Wait the 45‑day Period and If You
Don\'t Get Any Kind of a Response from Ibla Before Issuing the Decision,
the Wise Thing Would Be to Go to Your Solicitor and Get Them to Review
And it Give You the Go‑ahead If It\'s Appropriate.

Caller: Ok. Then My Second Question Is ‑‑ Could You Discuss More the
Difference Between an Enforceable Stipulation and a Nonenforceable
Stipulation?

M. von Koch: Sure. An Enforceable Stipulation Is One That Is Measurable
and That You Can Actually Follow Through With, Making Sure That ‑‑ You
Know Whether the Company Did or Did Not Do What You Said. A
Nonenforceable Stipulation Is One That Is So Open‑ended That You Can\'t
Determine Whether or Not it Was Complied With.

Caller: Well, I Guess I Would Like Some Clarification. I Mean, We Could
Determine ‑‑ If We Wanted the Company to Pay \$2,000 into this Bighorn
Sheep Study, Why Is That Stipulation Nonenforceable?

M. von Koch: Maybe by Calling It Nonenforceable That Wasn\'t The Best
Terminology. But We Cannot ‑‑ Unless We\'ve Had Studies in the past That
Have Determined That this Particular Proposal Is Going to Cause Damage
To, in this Case, It Was the Bighorn Sheep Population, and this
Particular Proposal Is Going to Take Them Over the Brink, in That
Situation You Could Require That They Pay the Money for the Mitigation.
We Did Not in Our Area Have Any Kind of Back‑up Information to Show That
Just this One Project Was Going to Cause That. It Was a Cumulation of
Factors And So We Were Not Able to Actually Use That as a Stipulation
for the Company.

Caller: Ok.

M. von Koch: Does That Help?

Caller: Yes, Thanks.

C. Calamaio: Ok. Peter, We Have One from a Peter Upstairs with the Lands
Academy. He Wants to Know, When the Agency\'s Fire Crews Are Available
on Site, Does this Absolve the Film Company of Liability If a Large Fire
Results from Their Pie Row Tech Nicks. I Imagine Some People ‑‑
Pyrotechnics Nicks.

Peter, I Think the Short Answer Is, No, it Does Not Resolve Them. It
Could Mitigate Some Their Damage. But Ultimately They Are Responsible
Because They Ultimately Were the Reason Why a Fire Started and That\'s
from What I Was Told from Our Fire Management Officer. So I Think
That\'s Pretty Accurate Information.

C. Calamaio: Great. Mark, Chandler Has a Question, And as Far as Nepa,
If a Proponent Goes off Public Lands As Part of the Filming Project,
Does Our Ea Need to Address it Or Do They Need to Submit an Ea To the
State for the Use of Private Lands That Also May, Let\'s Say, Have a T &
E Species On It? Anyone Want to Jump on That One?

P. Graves: Depending How Much On Private Land, Sometimes We Can Do Joint
Documents, and like In California, Mark, We Have the Sequa, and Most of
the Time I Any It\'s Just a Little Bit of Private Land, We Will Do a
Joint Document in Which We Will Be the Lead for the Action. I Know Some
Activities, like for Cultural Resources, If an Action Under the Public
Land Is Going To Affect Possible Cultural Resources on Private Land or
Non‑ BLM Land, Then We Will Have To Comply and Take That into Account in
Our Action and Our Environmental Assessment.

C. Calamaio: Ok. We Had Talked about Federal Property and Also ‑‑ You
Know, As Far as Our Film Permits, but Also Local Zoning Regulations And
We Got a Fax in from Anne With Our Lands School, and She Said That
Federal Property Is Exempt from Local Zoning Laws And Regulations. Do We
Simply Comply to Be a Good Neighbor or Have Things Changed That Make it
Mandatory for Us to Comply with Local and County ‑‑

P. Graves: under the Supremacy Clause, Basically the Federal Government
Is the Big Boy and We Don\'t Really Have to Comply with Local Zoning
Laws, But We Do out of Respect and out Being Just Good Neighbors.

C. Calamaio: Mary, Is That How You Run Things in Essence?

M. von Koch: That\'s What I Would Have Said, and Also it Does Document
Whether or Not We\'re Going to Have an Action That\'s in Consort with
the Local Land Use Plan.

C. Calamaio: this One Is Also To Mary. The Question Was ‑‑ in the
Example You Shared Offering an Alternative Site for Filming the Fall,
Did You Have to Publish Again an and Allow for Adverse Parties to
Comment?

M. von Koch: I Am Trying to Think What We Did.

L. von Der Esch: Did it Go That Far? It Seems to Me ‑‑

M. von Koch: We Issued the Decision, and We Did Not ‑‑ There Was Only
the One Decision, And That Was to Allow for the Partial ‑‑ or for the
Filming at Castle Rock, and the Company Never Did Come Back with an
Alternative Location for the Rectory. They Were Looking at Alternatives
in Our Area and Then Before They Actually Settled on Something, I Think
They Ended up Going to Monument Valley Instead. But If They Had Selected
Another Location on BLM, We Would Have Had to Go Back and Amend Our
Environmental Assessment and We Would Have Had a Second Decision.

C. Calamaio: Ok. Another Question from Alaska From Fairbanks ‑‑ How Do
We Notify the Public of These Appeal Periods?

P. Graves: They\'re Usually Put in the Newspaper. Like When We Have an
Environmental Assessment When We Have out for Public Review in
Ridgecrest, We Put it in the Newspaper and it Does Say That In the
Newspaper for a 30‑day Period, and I\'m Not Going to Get Into an Ibla
Decision Which the ‑‑ They Kind of Said How People Should Know about It,
but Basically It\'s Just When We Publish it in the Newspaper and The
Federal Register, It\'s Usually Drafted in There.

M. von Koch: We Have a Different System in Utah. We Have an Electronic
Bulletin Board on Which We Post All of Our Documents That Lead to a
Decision and What We Do Is We ‑‑ As Soon as We Have an Application, We
Put it on the Bulletin Board and Then We Track Status over Time, and
When We Get to the Point of Having an Appeal, it Would Then Also Reflect
That We Have a 30‑day Appeal Period.

C. Calamaio: Mary This, One Is a Little Technical Involving Some of Our
‑‑ the Written Materials in Our Workbook. I Think You Did Mention this
Earlier and this Is from Gary Hall, and He Wanted to Know ‑‑ Why Was Im
94‑59 Included in the Workbook When it Has Expired and Apparently Has
Not Been Renewed? The Ibla Decision on 2.25 in the Handbook, We Based
Our BLM Decision to Issue a Minimum Impact Permit on the Fact That The
Im Had Expired. That Seemed to Be a Conflict. Any Words for Gary There?

M. von Koch: I Thought I Kind Of Answered That this Morning, But the
Answer to the Question Is That I Was Trying to Provide As Much
Information to Our Students as Possible with Regards to Filming, and
Even Though We Have Expired Guidance, It Does Give Us a Basis for Making
‑‑ or Starting Point, I Should Say, for Other Offices to Establish What
Their Thresholds Will Be for Minimum Impact. It Was Just There for
Information Purposes. It Wasn\'t There to State That That Was Guidance
That Had to Be Followed and I Think ‑‑ Was There a Second Part to That?

C. Calamaio: the Issue Was That it Seemed to Be a Conflict Of Interest.
That Was Sort of Last Thought.

M. von Koch: Oh. Ok.

L. von Der Esch: I\'ve Been Aware of it Because We Worked With it as
Well. It\'s Very Strict, So If You Go From There Up, it Gives Guidance
In That Regard Because it Was Very, Very Tightly Drawn When it Came Out.

M. von Koch: and in Our Office, Because We Do Have Such Controversial
Decisions Regarding Film Permits, and Just ‑‑ I Really Want to Be
Consistent from Project to Project, and So That Is One of The Reasons
Why We Continue to Use That Guidance.

C. Calamaio: Speaking of Guidance, Dorothy, Who Is with Our Lands School
but Actually From Anchorage, She Says in Areas Where Land Use Plans Have
Not Been Approved, What Guidance Do You Use for Determining If Film
Requests Should Be Permitted? Good Question.

P. Graves: Good Question.

M. von Koch: I\'m Not ‑‑ I Guess I\'ve Never Run into a Situation Where
You Don\'t Have An Approved Land Use Plan. I Know There Are Definitely
Offices That Do Not Have Resource Management Plans but Are Still Working
with Mfps, or Management Framework Plans. I\'m Not Sure What You Would
Do If You Really Do Not Have Any Kind of a Land Use Plan in Place.

L. von Der Esch: Be Interesting to Hear from Lorraine Pope on That in
Kanab, Because I Believe the Land Use Plan for the Grand National
Staircase Is Not in Place Yet, And I Would Be Interested to Know What
She Would Do If She Got a Filming Request at this Time.

C. Calamaio: Well, If You\'re Watching, Lorraine, We\'re Going To Go to
a Break in a Minute and Maybe Give Us a Call During the Break and We\'ll
Talk to You About That. One Last Fax Before We Do Go to Break and this
Is a Great Sort Of Broadbrush BLM Type of Question.

M. von Koch: Oh, Boy!

C. Calamaio: Please Explain How Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Might
Be a Concern in Areas Where Film Permits Are Requested.

P. Graves: That Really Comes Under Our Cumulative Impact Analysis.
Multiple Use, Obviously, When You Have Filming, You Have to Also
Consider like Ohv, Camping, Sightseeing, Other Uses, Equestrian. So When
You Have All ‑‑ We Have To Take All These Uses into Consideration When
You\'re Thinking about Film Permits, Like ‑‑ We Have ‑‑ Ohv Areas Where
Three of Our Film Sites Are, Well, We Have Filming and Then We Have to
Inform the Film Companies, Hey, You Could Have a Race Going on Here of
500 Motorcycles, and That Kind of Stuff Where You Have to Take out The
Multiple Uses for Filming. It Could All Affect One Another.

M. von Koch: It\'s Just One of Multiple Uses of the Public Lands, and
That\'s a Good Point. I\'m Glad She Brought it Up.

C. Calamaio: in Essence, by Allowing Film Activities on Public Lands,
We\'re Complying With Flpma?

P. Graves: Right.

C. Calamaio: Now it Is Time For That Short Break, but When We Pick
Things up Again, We\'re Going to Get into Technical Scouting, Production
Compliance, And Monitoring. A Loft You Have Sent in Faxes About
Monitoring. We Hope Our Presentation Will Address Some of Those
Questions. And Leigh Is Going to Give Us Some Perspectives from the
Industry Side of Things and Her View as a Film Commissioner. See You
Soon.

C. Calamaio: Again, Welcome Back to Our Film Permitting Satellite
Course. Before We Start Things up Again, I Would like to Mention an
Upcoming Event on the BLM Satellite Network. Next Wednesday, May 24th,
We Will Be Broadcasting an Overview Of BLM\'s Draft Land Use Planning
Manual and Handbook. This Program Will Examine the Major Provisions of
the Revised Planning Guidance and How When Finalized the New Planning
Process Will Replace Much of the Existing Planning Manual. We Believe
That You and Everyone In Your Office Who Is Involved In Planning Will
Find this Program of Interest. And Now That That Commercial Is Out of
the Way, Right on the Subject of Planning, We Have Lorraine on the
Phone. Lorraine Pope from Kanab. What Was Discussed Before the Break Was
When Issuing Filming Permits in Areas Where You Don\'t Have an Approved
Land Use Plan, How Do You Deal with That Part Of the Ea? I Would like to
Say Hello to Lorraine. Thanks for Calling In.

Caller: Hi.

C. Calamaio: How Is it You\'re Working Things up There with the New
Monument Plan Not Completely Finalized?

Caller: Well, Actually We Do Now Have Our Plan Out. It Was Effective
February of This Year, but We Operated For, Oh, about Three‑and‑a‑half
Years Without an Approved ‑‑ at Least For the Monument, Without an
Approved Monument Management Plan. So What We Did, We Did Have Right
after the Monument Was Established the Department Came Out with Interim
Guidance for How We Would Manage the Monument In the Interim Period
until a Management Plan Was Completed. So What We Did Was We Took the
Interim Guidance, it Was Real General, but We Took That as Our Overall
Guidance, and Then What We Said Was, When We Would Talk About That
Portion of Eas for Conform Once the Management Plan, What We Did Was We
Would Refer to the Applicable Mfp and We Said, as Long as it Did Not
Conflict with Our Direction in The Interim Guidance, Then We Would Go by
What Was in the Old Mfp.

L. von Der Esch: Lorraine, This Is Leigh. I Know That I Continued to
Send Projects Your Way. It Didn\'t Hold Us from Referring People down to
That Area of the State. And Appreciate the Opportunity To Comment. As
You Know, as You Went Through That Planning Process, it Was Very Helpful
for Us to Be Able To Give Input. So I Look Forward to Seeing a Copy of
That, and If You\'ll Send One up to Me, I Would Certainly Appreciate It.

Caller: Certainly. And Just for Some Other ‑‑ What We Did in General
During the Interim Guidance Was I Guess That the Interim Guidance Was
Pretty General, and What We Had To Go By, Too, Was S‑the Big Overriding
Thing Was the Presidential Proclamation Which Established the Monument,
and it Was the Gist of That Was Very ‑‑ Was Protection of These Various
Resources That Were Listed in The Proclamation, and We Didn\'t Want to
Be ‑‑ and this Was Not Just Filming, this Was All Kinds Of Stuff ‑‑ We
Didn\'t Want to Be Issuing Authorizations for Activities That Might Be
in Conflict with What Was Going to Eventually Come out in the Management
Plan. So What We Did for Filming During the Interim Period Is We Were
Only Issuing Minimum Impacts, What We Determined Were Minimum Impact
Projects, and Then Actually What Came out in Our Final Plan Was We Have
the Monument Broken into Four Different Management Zones and It Was
Saying That Filming Could Be Authorized in the Monument Provided it Went
‑‑ and it Changed from Only Minimum Impact To as Long as it Met the
Various Zone Criteria.

M. von Koch: Thanks, Lorraine. I Hope That Also Answers Wendy\'s
Question That She Asked Yesterday.

Caller: Ok.

L. von Der Esch: And, Lorraine, I\'m Glad I Thought I Said You Were
Operating from Minimum Impact and You Were with Wsa and Wa Moving
Forward. Thank You for Your Comments.

C. Calamaio: Great, Lorraine. Thanks a Lot. In Terms of Our next
Section, We\'re Going to Start Things off By Explaining Just What
Happens During the Film Company\'s Technical Scouting Trip and Just What
That Is and How BLM Should Work with Everybody. Mary?

M. von Koch: Well, I Think That the Technical Scout Is Really Important
for Complex Projects. It\'s an Opportunity to Meet with The Heads of the
Departments of A Filming Company and Discuss BLM\'s Concerns. What the
Technical Scout Is, It\'s the Time When the Department Heads, the
Director, The Producer, Location Manager, The Heads of All the
Departments Come to the Area Where They\'re Going to Be Filming Before
They Actually Go into Production, and They Go to Each Location and
Determine the Technical Aspects Of Doing the Filming That They Intend to
Do in That Location, And this Is a Really Good Opportunity for the BLM
to Go Over the Stipulations for Each Location, Talk about the
Parameters, the Boundaries, Everything That Relates to That Particular
Location, Any Special Concerns. This Would Be a Good Time to Also Let
Them Know What the Resources Are and the Fact That You\'re Going to Want
to Provide Information in the Call Sheets To the ‑‑ for the Crew to Know
What the Values Are and Why the Restrictions Are in Place. One Thing
That\'s Really Good at The Technical Scout Is That You Have the
Attention of All These People. At this Point They\'re Not Busy In
Production When Everything Is Harried and They Have No Time to Really
Stop and Look at the Location with You and Look at it From a Different
Perspective. It Really Is Very Important to Work with the Company at
this Point and Get These Issues Ironed Out.

L. von Der Esch: and If You Can, Include Your Film Commissioner, Too, on
the Technical Scout, Because I Think It\'s Helpful, Again, Chip for Us
To Be Involved and Get as Much Information and I Think We Talked about
it Yesterday, Two Sets of Ears Are Important. It\'s Helpful for Us to
Know What The Company Has Represented to You and Likewise Back to the
Company, Because I Think We Get ‑‑ Get Put in a Position of Mary Said
This, and to Have ‑‑ Having Heard Mary Not Say That, I Think It\'s
Helpful for Us to Say, No, That\'s Not What I Heard Mary Say.

M. von Koch: Then this Preproduction Stage, You Also Have the Head of
the Transportation Department, and It\'s Really Important at That Point
to Let Them Know What the Boundaries Are of Their Vehicle Staging Areas
and Also to Request That the Company Assign The BLM a Two‑way Radio So
That Can You Listen in on What\'s Going on While You\'re Doing the
Monitoring.

C. Calamaio: So, Leigh, Quite Often You Guys Are in the Loop In Terms of
If You Have Advance Notice of the Scouting or Just ‑‑ If Your Office Has
Been Informed?

L. von Der Esch: Absolutely. We like to Be in That Loop. Most the Time
We Know They\'re Coming in for a Technical Scout And Certainly on the
Large Projects, We Will Fly into the Part of the State to Meet One Mary
and We\'ll All Go out Together.

M. von Koch: Now, When the Company Comes Back, I Would like To Talk
about What Actually Happens in the Compliance Stage And What We\'re
Looking for as The BLM Monitors. First of All, We Want to Make Sure When
We\'re ‑‑ That the Company Is in the Right Place, You Know, That They
Are Definitely in the Place Where They Said They Were Going to Be And at
the Right Time and That On Location They Are Complying With the
Stipulations That Have Been Derived for the Resource Protection. So Then
What Happens If the Company Is in Noncompliance? I Think a Lot of That
Has to Do With the Circumstances of the Company Being in Noncompliance
And the Attitude of the Company. I Think If You Have a Situation In
Which a Company Because of Misinformation or Miscommunication Is in
Noncompliance, and If the Adverse Impacts to the Resources Are Not Great
and the Company Is Willing to Work with You to Remedy the Situation,
That You Can Go Ahead and Take Care of The Problem Right Then and
Continue with the Filming. On the Other Hand, If You Have a Situation
Where You Know That The Company Knew What the Stipulations Were, They
Blatantly Went Against the Stipulations, You Know ‑‑ Anything it Takes
to Get That Shot Sort of Thing, and Their Attitude Is, You Know, That
Time Is Money and it Doesn\'t Matter, You Know, We\'ll Take Care of This
Later, or Not Worry about It, I Think Those Would Be Definitely Better
Grounds for Suspending the Filming Activities and Not ‑‑ Well, Yeah,
Suspending the Filming Activities.

L. von Der Esch: I Think It\'s Important, Chip, the Distinction, as Mary
Said, this Isn\'t the Only Industry Where Sometimes the Right Hand
Doesn\'t Know What the Left Hand Is Doing. I Mean, it Is Not the Only
Industry. And I Think There Is a Distinction That Needs to Be Made
Between When It\'s Malicious And They Are, You Know, Very Clearly ‑‑
Have Very Clearly Been Given Instructions by You, And Where They Are
Just Scrambling Because of a Weather Problem or an Actor That\'s Gotten
Sick or Something Has Come up and They Just Didn\'t Communicate All the
Way down the Line. This Can Happen When You Have First Unit One in Place
and Second Unit in Another Place, And it Can Be Remedied Very Quickly
Without Having to Draw Everything to a Screeching Halt. And, Actually,
in My Experience As a Film Commissioner over the Years, a Half‑hour
Stoppage of Work Gets Things Back on Track Very, Very Quickly.

C. Calamaio: That Gets People\'s Attention.

L. von Der Esch: You Don\'t Have to Hold Them for Two Weeks. It Gets
Resolved Quickly.

M. von Koch: I Have Another Point. It Doesn\'t Matter Whether ‑‑ Which
of the Two Situations We\'re Talking about in Noncompliance. The Monitor
Does Need to Document the Incidence of Noncompliance and What\'s Helpful
Is to Take Photographs to Show What Happened, What the Impacts Were to
the Resources, Video, If You Have a Video Camera with You, and
Definitely Notes to the File. And While I\'m Talking about Files, I
Would like to Show the Students What the File Looked Like for \"City
Slickers.\"

C. Calamaio: I See You Brought a Boat Anchor with You.

M. von Koch: Just About. In the Serialized Case File, I Have the
Company\'s Application, The Environmental Document, and The Actual
Authorization Document, and Then When We Went Into Monitoring, I Set up
a Separate File. Now, I\'ll Give You a Little Example of What We Do in
That Case. On One Side of the File ‑‑ this Is in Pencil, but Mostly I
Wanted to Give You an Idea of What I\'m Doing When I\'m Monitoring ‑‑
Especially for the 5440 Accounts, the Full‑cost Reimbursement Where BLM
Is Actually on Site. I Document Which Location They Were Using, the Days
That They Were Actually Filming and Then Who Is Going to Be on Site
Doing The Monitoring. This Helps Later on to Establish What the Fees
Should Be, Especially If They\'ve Paid Advance Rental and Additional
Fees May Be Required. On the Other Side of the File Are the Actual ‑‑
Ok. These Are the Field Notes That Were Taken by a Monitor on Location.
We General ‑‑ What We Generally Do in Our Office Is to Be with The
Company, Note What They\'re Doing, Have a Copy of the Stipulations at
All Times, and Then While the Company Takes a Break, Especially at Lunch
Time, It\'s a Really Good Time to Go Back to the Locations That They
Used in the Morning and Document, You Know, What the Use Of the Public
Lands, and If at That Point We Can See What the Reclamation Needs Are,
Start Making a Record of That.

C. Calamaio: So You\'re Finding During the Lunch Hour When They\'re Kind
of Away, it Kind of Gives You in Essence a Chance to Look at Things with
The Dust Settled, Concentrate on The Resources?

M. von Koch: Yes, Yes, That\'s Correct.

C. Calamaio: Leigh, Do You Have Some Thoughts on Documentation Related
to the Media?

L. von Der Esch: I Think It\'s Terrific the Way Mary Documents Things,
Chip, Because the Thing That Can Happen When There Is Noncompliance Is
it Becomes a Runaway Media Train. As We Discussed Yesterday, Mary,
There\'s a Room You Are Factor That Goes with a Lot of the Occurrences
That Happen on Public Lands and I Think by Having Your Office Document
What\'s Occurring from a Compliance Standpoint and a Noncompliance
Standpoint, You Can Deal with the Media Frenzy. I Know in One Instance
We Had a Media Frenzy Going Where a Production Company Was Accused Of
Bulldozing an Antiquities, And in Actually the County Road Was Washed
out in a Flood, and The County Went in to Regrade it And There Were
Rocks of Concern, But They Were Nothing More and I Don\'t Mean to
Diminish It, but They Were Anything That Could Be Encountered by Anyone
That Was Throughout in an Suv, but Without the Documentation ‑‑ it Just
Happened to Be the Film Company, and with the Appropriate Documentation,
You Can at Least Try to Bring Some Balance into a Media Coverage, And
That\'s Not Unique to Filming, Because I Think You\'ve Had the Same
Thing with the Tree Chaining Thing down There, What You Were Doing Was
Documented in One Way, What Was Being Portrayed in the Media Was
Completely Different. I Think It\'s Very Important.

M. von Koch: Your Case File Is a Really Good Record of What Has Taken
Place from Your Perspective.

C. Calamaio: I Guess Maybe at This Point, Peter and Leigh, Do You Have
Any Other Samples or Case Studies of Some Noncompliance Issues?

P. Graves: Well, We Found in Ridgecrest, Even Though 95 to 98% of the
Crews Weaver Dealt Warrior Pretty Good, and They Try to Comply as Best
They Can With the Stipulations, There Have Been a Few Instances Where We
Dealt with Some Crews That We Had ‑‑ Because They Were So Bad, We Had to
Implement New Policies. For Instance, There Was an Example Where We
Dropped ‑‑ Where the Crew Either Deliberately or Unintentionally Dropped
a Vehicle in a Wilderness Area after They Were Told Not To, and
Basically it Was ‑‑ They Just Dropped and it Just Removed and it Got
Fined. To That ‑‑ to More Serious Ones Where Crews Deliberately Dropped
Sewage as They Left. Another One Where ‑‑ Actually it Was the Same Crew,
They Said They Were Going to Have Five Motorcycles and Actually Had 500
Motorcycles. Other Crews That Said, We\'re Going to Be on Site for One
Day And They\'re There for Three Days, Which Then Brings up Willful and
False Information, Which Is a Criminal Offense Under Title 18 Usc 1001.
And Then the One That Ultimately Just Recently Happened Was One Where
Two Kangaroos Were Injured On Site and Which Caused Us to Implement the
Policy for Animal Monitoring in Ridgecrest. Do You Have Any?

L. von Der Esch: I Can Think Of One Instance in Southern Utah Where a
Car Was Taken into a River and it Was Noncomplying For Two Reasons.
Number One, They Didn\'t Have Permission. Number Two, Because They Were
Supposed to Drain the Car of All The Fluids When They Brought the Car
Up, it Had Not Been Drained Of Battery Acid and Oil and So On and So
Forth. But I Have Been Doing this Job For 15 Years, Started When I Was
20 ‑‑ It\'s All Right to Laugh.

M. von Koch: I Don\'t Believe It.

L. von Der Esch: I\'ve Had Hundreds of Permits and Very, Very Few
Noncompliance Things. One Thing I Would Point out and I Think We
Discussed it Yesterday, Amongst Ourselves, Is The Fact That Our Greatest
Noncompliance Typically Comes From Those Who Come from a Different
Culture or Country Where Their Environmental Laws Are Not the Same as
Ours. I Think, Peter, You Have Experienced That in Ridgecrest. You Know,
this Is a Global Industry, Folks. Let\'s Face It. We Have the Bbc in
Utah this Week Filming. We\'ve All Dealt with Different Countries. We
Are Environmentally Sensitive, and That\'s Why Our Country Is So
Beautiful. But We Do Have Other Cultures Coming in That Are Making
Projects and They Just Do Not Have the Environmental Regulations That We
Have, Would You Not Agree with That? And Experienced it Probably.

P. Graves: Most of Our Problems Came from American Crews, Though. The
Japanese Crews That We Have Dealt with Have Been Very Respectful Because
a Loft Times They Can\'t Film like on Their Public Lands, and ‑‑ and the
German Crews a Always Been Very Good to Work With. It\'s ‑‑ Our Problems
Are the Small ‑‑ Small Companies Who Lack Money and the Student Films.

L. von Der Esch: Lower Budget.

C. Calamaio: Leigh, You Have Been Talking about this Being an Industry.
Is Part of the Perspective Here That the Professional Studios, The
People That Are Really Geared up for this Full Time Take Care of
Business and Do Things Correctly, While Maybe Some of These Smaller
Companies, Without the Resources, Without The Experience, Might Be a
Little More in the Noncompliance Category?

L. von Der Esch: I Think So. And I Think by and Large, It\'s Not a
Malicious Intent on Their Part. There Is No Question That a Steven
Speilberg Has an Infrastructure That\'s Completely Different and So Many
of the Great Directors like Clint Eastwood and Steven Speilberg, They
Work with the Same Crews a Lot. They Have Been with Each Other Over the
Years and So They\'re Like Greased Lights Inning When They Come In. And,
Again, You Know, Having Done the Job, it Is the Least ‑‑ It\'s Not a
Pleasurable Part of a Film Commissioner\'s Job to Have To Deal with a
Location That\'s Been Disabused and I Wouldn\'t Have Lasted this Long If
the Majority of Them Had Been Rather Than the Reverse.

C. Calamaio: While We\'re Kind Of Still on this Topic of Compliance,
Peter, Perhaps You Could Visit with Us about What We Can Do to Ensure
That Everyone Does Comply.

P. Graves: Well, Chip, Production Monitoring Is a Great Tool to Prevent
Damage to the Natural Resources. In Ridgecrest, Often Contract Monitors
Are Used to Go out with Film Crews as Representatives of BLM. These
Contractors Ensure That The Companies Remain in Compliance with the
Terms and Conditions Outlined in Their Permit.

M. von Koch: Peter, Could You Tell Us How Your Monitoring Program Was
Set up in Ridgecrest?

P. Graves: Our Program Started Basically Because BLM Staff Was Unable to
Monitor Production, and Our Office Had To, Therefore, Set up Memoranda
Of Understanding Between Us and Local Contracting Agencies. Some of
These Examples Can Be Found in Appendix Three of Your Workbook.
Basically What Our Monitors Do Is They Go Out, They Go out with The
Company, I Usually Inform The Company They\'re Going to Have Monitoring,
Tell Them Which Company Will Have ‑‑ Which the Company Will Have to Pay
For, And They Will Ensure Compliance. We Will Give Them a Brief Course
Of What They Have to Do, What They\'re Looking For, Give Them The
Stipulations and Then They Will Go out to Look at the Conditions and
Making Sure the Companies Are Complying and Because of Our Location,
Most of Our Locations Are 35 to 45 Minutes Away from Our Office, at
Times, If They Are Serious Enough Problems, the Monitor Will Have
Authority to Shut the Company down until We Get There And See What\'s
Going On. We Also Have a Lot of Dead Zones For Radios and Phones, Which
Plays into It. When We Monitor, Monitoring Is Most Needed in Ridgecrest
When We Use a New Location or with Special Effects, Stunts and Now With
Animals. So That\'s Basically with a We Have Done. How Is Your Program
in Moab?

M. von Koch: We Have Also a Third‑party Monitoring Program In Moab, and
It\'s Based on an Mou, or Memorandum of Understanding, Which Is Also
Found in Appendix 3, and the Mou Was Signed by Agencies Besides The BLM.
The State Agencies, State Trust And Sovereign Lands Were Signing
Parties, However, the National Park Service Did Not Sign the Document.
They Chose to Keep All Their Monitoring Internal with Their Own Law
Enforcement Officers. But the Key Thing about Our Monitoring Program Is
That We Originally Had a Workshop to Get People ‑‑ I Would Call it ‑‑
Would Call it Certified. We Gave Them Information about The Requirements
for the Different Agencies. We Had Them Take a Test at the End of the
Day, in Which They Had to Pass with a 90% Competency. And this Resulted
in a List of ‑‑ I Think It\'s about 22 People That the Companies Could
Call on To Be Monitors on Site, and the BLM ‑‑ in the BLM for the Small
Shoots, We Do Require That They Contract with a Monitor. Then What We Do
Is on an Annual Basis, We Get Together with the Monitors. They Talk
about the Techniques That Have Worked for Them in the Past Year, and
Discuss Any Additional Things That the Agencies Can Do to Help Them Out,
since When They Are on Location They Are the Representatives of the
Agencies, And One Interesting Thing That Came out of this Was That the
Monitors Wanted to Have a Form Of Identity on Location. They Requested
That We Provide Them with a Hat and a Badge So That When They\'re There
Representing Our Agencies, It\'s Obvious That That\'s the Job That
They\'re Doing, and It\'s Worked Very Well for Us.

L. von Der Esch: it Helps Us When We Visit Set, Mary, Because We Know
Who You Have Got on Site, and If It\'s Not a BLM Person in a Full
Uniform, We Can Spot Them Right Away. It\'s Very Helpful for Us.

P. Graves: and the Film Crews Also Pay Your Company Directly Or Do They
Pay You and Then You Kind of Pay the Company?

M. von Koch: That Was One of The Items That Was Very Interesting in
Putting the Mou Together Because We Weren\'t Sure What Conflict of
Interest Issues We Were Going to Have, and for Both the State Agencies
and the BLM, it Would Have Been an Accounting Nightmare to Have the
Monies from the Company Come Directly to the Agency and Then Have the
Agencies Disseminate The Money to Pay for the Monitoring. One of the
Other Things Is That Where Some of the Companies Will Have a Permit from
the BLM and Also from a State Agency Because Of Having Adjacent
Properties, If the Company Starts Filming on BLM Then Moves onto State
Lands, What Do You Do, Prorate the Amount That\'s Going to Be Paid? So
this Actually Has Worked Really Well to Have the Companies Pay Them
Directly, and We Haven\'t Really Had Any Problem of a Conflict of
Interest. Should I Knock on Wood?

C. Calamaio: Now That We Know Who Can Monitor, I Think, Peter, You\'ve
Got Some Comments about Some of the Issues Involving Professionalism,
the Ethics of This Business?

P. Graves: Yes. We Also Have to Remember That Public Perception Is the
Key. If the Public Starts Seeing Us As BLM Monitors ‑‑ or Even Our
Contracted Monitors Eating with The Film Crews, Taking Photo
Opportunities with the Celebrities and Stars, Taking And Picking up
T‑shirts and Other Perks from the Companies, The Public Is Going to
Start Wondering Exactly Who Are We Working For. Are We Working for the
United States, the Public or Are We Working for the Film Crew and Only
for Our Own Self‑glory? Another Thing We Have to Remember Is Our
Professionalism And Attitude on Set. A Lot of Film Crews Do Talk like
The Film Commissions Talk and Like BLM Talk to One Another and We Have
To, You Know, Know That We Always Have to Remain a Professional Image on
Set. Also, There Are Also Confidential Issues We Have to Deal With. A
Lot of the New Car Models Come Out and Just like Movie Stars And
Celebrities, There Are New Car Paparazzis and We Have to Keep Some of
the New Models Under Wraps, Some of the Ones Not out in Magazines Yet.

L. von Der Esch: We Have Been Very Fortunate. I Have Been Pleased with
the People in Utah When I Have Gone To Price and out in the Bonneville
Salt Flats. I Think Peter Raises Some Very Good Points on the ‑‑ It\'s
the Attitude. I Think Some per ‑‑ Perception Is Reality, and All of Us
May Have a Bad Day. I Mean, May Get Criticized Because the Way We\'re
Coming Across in Terms of Our Attitude Towards the Public or Towards The
Producer, and I Just Think It\'s Important That, You Know, The
Production Industry ‑‑ They Feel They Pay Taxes, They Feel They Are Land
Users Themselves, And They Recognize Not in Every Instance That It\'s
Multiple Use In the Way That it Is and That Maybe You Manage the Land
with a Slightly Different Mandate than The National Parks or Forest
Service, but It\'s an Attitude of One of Cooperation, and If You Give
Good Client Service and Act Like a Professional, it Cuts Both Ways. You
Have Right to Expect the Same.

C. Calamaio: I Think Also Too In Terms of the BLM Realty Staff Out
There, it Is a Little Tempting. This Is a Glamorous Business, Major
Hollywood Stars. There\'s a Lot of Excitement Associated with Motion
Picture Production. I Think That Staying Focus on The Mission Is Part of
the Challenge. Peter, What Are Some of the Other Issues to Consider as
Far As Monitoring?

P. Graves: Other Issues That You Need to Consider Are Obviously the ‑‑
Life, Safety And Haz‑mat Issues. Like I Said, We Did Have the Company
Dump All Their Sewage on Us as They Left, and the Company ‑‑ That
Company Shall Remain Nameless. And There Are Also Issues of Like They
Left All Their ‑‑ Another Company Left All Their Garbage Bags but Yet
Foolish Enough to Have the Call Sheets And Addresses and Home Telephone
Numbers. Other Examples We Have to Look At Are Also Osha. That Comes
into Kind of a Gray Area for Our Permit Process Because, You Know, Our
Regulations Say All Applicable Laws and Regulations? What the Definition
of Applicable? Is it ‑‑ So That\'s What We Have To Look at and We Have
to Talk About. With the Disney Accident, Osha Was Involved, and Osha Did
Levy A Fine Against Disney for the Death That Resulted on the Set. Other
Issues That We Need to Be Aware of Are Firearms and Those Kind of
Issues. A Lot of the Crews Come into Ridgecrest and Bring out Their Own
Personal Firearms and They Use Them During Breaks and Stuff, and It\'s
Always Good to Inform Your Law Enforcement When Both Prop Guns and Real
Guns Are On Set.

C. Calamaio: Ok, Leigh, Other Thoughts on Compliance, Monitoring?

L. von Der Esch: You Know, I Think, by and Large from What I\'ve Heard
from the Industry, They Have Been Very Accepting of Monitoring. I Think
Our Compliance Issues Have Gone down Dramatically. As I Mentioned
Before, Film Commissioners Talk to Each Other, and If We\'re Not
Particularly Familiar with a Company or Producer, I Try to Get out of
Them Where They Worked Before and Then Call the Appropriate Film
Commissioner in Oregon or Georgia or Wherever And Get Some Feedback from
What Their Experience Was in Terms of Their Compliance, Whether or Not
They Pay Their Bills, Do They Clean up after Them, and We\'ve Had Good
Success with That in Changing Kind of the Complexion Of Their Use of the
Lands in That Regard. As Far as Monitoring Goes, I Think, Again, by and
Large, the Industry Has Been Very Accepting Of That, Because it Gives
Them Protection and I Think the Location Managers Appreciate a Good
Monitor, Mary, and Peter, Because They Sometimes Can Get The Word up the
Chain of Command To What Is Occurring on Set and Have a Monitor from the
BLM on Site Say, this Is Just Not Working According to Your Permit Is
Incredibly Helpful All Way up And down the Line of the Production
Company. So I Applaud Your Efforts and Your Training of Who Your
Monitors Are out There. I Can\'t Think of an Instance, Chip, Where
We\'ve Had a Complaint Against Any Monitors On Set And, of Course, I\'m
Really Grateful For. I Know You Were Interested in Possibly Some
Feedback on Nepa Issues Because You Had Discussed That Earlier in the
Day, and That\'s a Little Trickier. As a Matter of Fact, it Brings Me
into a Fax You Had Earlier This Morning from Fairbanks, Chip and That
Was from a Gentleman Asking about Whether Or Not Production Companies
with All the Paper Work That They See Coming at Them, Because the Files
You Just Showed, Mary, From \"Geronimo\" Were a Bit Daunting. Or \"City
Slickers,\" Either One. That Was the Exception, Not the Rule, in Terms
of Documenting a Filming Permit. But the Nepa Documentation, It\'s Just
Not That Familiar to a Creative Industry. It Can Appear Incredibly
Daunting and I Think One of the Biggest Problems, One of the Biggest
Issues with Nepa and the Ea And, Mary, We\'ve Discussed This, Is When
Does the Clock Start Running? When Do the Expenses Start to Be Incurred?
I Know on ‑‑ We Had a Bit of a Chicken and Egg Situation on
\"Ghostriders,\" Even Though the Film Didn\'t Guy Forward, Because The
Company Made That Decision, Not Because of Any Environmental Concerns,
but What Occurred Was There Was a Lot of Technical Scouting That Had to
Go On. We Had Two Tech Scouts ‑‑ the Script Hadn\'t Even Been Written,
If You Remember. They Were Still in the Creative Process. You Had
Upwards to 17 Members of Wildlife Resources, Yourself and Others on Site
with Us for at Least Two If Not Three Full Days Trying to Find out
Whether or Not a Permit Could Even Be Considered for That Area. Then One
of the Concerns of the Permitting Was Going to Be Access to the Area.
And There Would Have to Be an Engineering Study Done on What Could Be
Done. And the Whole Question in the Nepa Documentation and the Whole
Environmental Assessment and the Technical Reports Required, the Clock
Is Starting to Run. Can You Maybe Shed Light on That? Maybe Some of Your
Fellow People In the Field Offices Might Not Know about That, Either.

M. von Koch: it Was a Very Unusual Set of Circumstances in That the
Company Wanted Guarantees That If They Filed an Application That They
Would Be Able to Use a Location. They Wanted to Do Major Set
Construction in an Area That Was Only Accessible by Four‑wheel Drive,
Which Meant That They\'d Have to Improve the Access Road To Allow Them
to Get the Equipment in for Set Construction. They Wand to Do Cavalry
Scenes So That Eventually They Would Have to Bring in ‑‑ I Believe it
Was Something like 200 Horses ‑‑ Something in That ‑‑ the Script Wasn\'t
Written, and Some of the Key Issues Were the Fact That For the Cavalry
Scenes They Were Going to Run Horses and All the Entourage That Goes
with a Cavalry, the Cannons, Because This Was like an 1870s Scenario,
Something like That. They Wanted to Come Across Land With Black Brush, a
Very ‑‑ a Vegetation That Would Not Come Back If it Were Disturbed.
There Were Cryptobiotic Soils, Which Are Considered Sensitive Soils, and
it Became Political Immediately Because We Were Talking about an \$85
Million Project, And, Again, as Leigh Mentioned, it Was a Chicken and
Egg Situation. The Company Wasn\'t Ready to File An Application, and Yet
We Needed to Go out and Look at the Location and See Whether Reclamation
Was Even Possible Before We Could Guarantee That We Would at Least Look
at That Location. The Company Would Not Consider Alternative Locations
Which We Suggested. We Did Go out on Location to the Alternative Site,
Which Had Access, and from My View, Not Being the Creative Person That
The Companies Were, I Thought Would ‑‑ Met the Criteria. The Company
Decided That it Did Not. They Absolutely Had Fallen in Love with
Determination Towers In the Background and Nothing Else Would Do. After
All This, the Answer to The Question Was, We Did Not Know at What Point
the BLM Should Not Be Incurring the Costs of Going out and Doing Field
Checks Prior to Having the Application and Setting up a Cost
Reimbursement Account, Which We Eventually Did Do. But We ‑‑ We Ate It,
Basically, Two Field Checks Probably to the Tune of \$20,000 Incurred in
BLM Time And, You Know, Flying People from Salt Lake City, the Whole
Thing, Before We Actually Had an Application in Hand.

L. von Der Esch: but the Difficult Thing Is, How Does a Company Know If
You\'re Going to Say Yes Unless Then Can Get to a Certain Part of the
Processing Of the Permit, and I Think the Perception Is That They Are
Unclear Going in about What the Nepa Process Will Be and Where They Are
Going to Start Incurring the Cost. This Was ‑‑ this Was an Exception,
But, Again, It\'s When The Creativity Slams up Against The Bureaucracy
That I Think it Gets a Little Bit Hard. Other Thing, I Don\'t Know How
You Will Overcome this When Doing Technical Scouts or When You Are
Talking to a Production Company about What Environmental Activities,
Assessments and What Documents Will Be Needed and What They\'ll Have to
Pay For, Is Getting Back to Again the Multiple Use on the Public Land.
When You Get out There with a Producer or a Unit Production Manager, a
Location Manager, and You Start Telling Them about Everything That Needs
to Be Done In Order to Go Through the Permitting Process and What Their
Financial Obligation Is, And They See Other Land Users Roaring Around
Them, Doing Things That Are Being Denied to Them, it Gets Very Difficult
to Explain Just Anecdotally One Story, Chip, We Were Scouting at One
Point with \"Geronimo,\" and They Were Using the Little Sahara Sand
Dunes and We Had 19 People That Had Come in from the Company, and That
Was No Small Expense for Them, and We Went Through with the BLM Staff
What Was Going to Have to Occur, And, In Fact, the Weekend Before There
Were Atvs‑used It, Easter Weekend, I Believe Is a Very Big Weekend in
the Little Sahara Sand Dunes, and the BLM People Were Great about Being
on Site And Telling Them What They Needed, and Then the Director Said,
We\'re Going to Have to Bring in a \$35,000 Piece of Equipment. We Need
a Wind Machine in Here To Get All the Atv Tracks out Before We Can Even
Use It. Well, the ‑‑ You Know, the Use Of the Resources by Other Parties
Is Not Unnoticed by the Production Industry, and Then They Take a Look
at What\'s Occurring Around Them While They\'re Scouting, And, Again, it
Gets a Little Daunting.

P. Graves: I Would Agree with Leigh on That Issue. A Lot of the Biggest
Complaints Are the Companies Say, Why Can They Do It, You Know, You Say
You Can\'t Drive off Road, but Look at this Guy Driving off Road.
Usually My Response Is You\'re Permitted and They\'re Not and If Law
Enforcement, Which They\'re Not, and They\'re Not Because We Only Have
Five Rangers in a 1.8 Million Acre Area, It\'s Difficult, but They Would
Have Gotten Cited If Law Enforcement Was Around.

C. Calamaio: We Have a Fax From Shirley in the Lands Academy and We\'ve
Touched on This, a Little Clarification, Though Are, Who Is Responsible
For the Cost of the BLM Monitor Is Travel Is Necessary and Would That Be
Part of the Cost Recovery?

M. von Koch: it Depends on Which Cat Gore Eve Cost Reimbursement We\'re
Talking About. Definitely If They\'re on Full Cost Reimbursement,
Category 5, That Is One of the Expenses We Would Be Able to Attach to
That.

P. Graves: and for Our Monitor We Usually Pay Them Basically the ‑‑ like
Not per Diem, but ‑‑ Not Only Do We Get, Let\'s Say the \$30 an Hour,
They Also Get the 30 Cents or Whatever it Is per Mile. So They Get
Reimbursed for Their Vehicle Use.

C. Calamaio: We Also Got a Fax from the Land School from Natalie and
this One We Have Been Holding for a While Because I Knew We Were
Hopefully Going To Answer a Lot with this Presentation. Her Question Was
Do Regulations Require Monitoring for Film Activity? I Think We\'ve Kind
of Addressed. If Not, What Determines Whether We Do Monitor and to What
Magnitude. We Haven\'t Talked about Magnitude of Monitoring. I Imagine
it Changes with Special Effects, Stunts, First And Second Units.

P. Graves: Just ‑‑ Ours Is Basically the Size of the Production, How
Long They\'re Going to Be There, What They Plan to Do. Usually Our
Monitors Are There ‑‑ When They Get on Public Land To the Minute They
Leave Public Land and We Don\'t Have ‑‑ We Don\'t Have Them for All Our
Productions. Just These Major Ones That Have Like New Locations,
Animals, Explosives, Special Effects, Stunts or Anywhere Where We as An
Office Believe That the Public Lands Could Be Damaged.

M. von Koch: Actually, in Our Area, We Require That the Company Have a
Third‑party Monitor for Almost Every One of Our Film Permits Right Now.
There Are Very Productions Where We Don\'t Have That Requirement. And I
Can Tell You That it Has Made a Really Big Difference for Us to Know
That Regardless of The Size of the Company or the Activities That
They\'re Going to Do That Somebody Is There, as Peter Said, from the
First Vehicle That Rolls into Location Until They Finish Raking up or
Any Kind of Reclamation. For the Larger Projects, the BLM Generally Will
Handle the Monitoring Ourselves.

L. von Der Esch: One Final Thought, Too, Chip and Again This Gets Back
to Great Communication Between the BLM Office and the Film Commissioner,
If Do You Have a Noncompliance Issue, Because in States like Wyoming,
Nevada, State Film Commissioners Are Covering a Very Broad Area, and
There May Not Be a Local Film Commission in That Area, Please Let Us
Know. I Don\'t Think There Is Anything More Frustrating for Those of Us
Doing this Job than to Think We Brought a Production Company That\'s
Gone into an Area Where We Are Not Visiting on a Regular Basis Because
it Could Be Hundreds of Miles Away, and After the Fact, Months Later, We
Find out There Was a Noncompliance Issue That Occurred and We Didn\'t
Know About it and Now It\'s Become a Horror Story. We\'d like to Know,
as You Know, Mary, Right from the Get‑go. Peter, I Know You Talked to
Ray Arthur on a Regular Basis and to Be Able to Say, I Knew about It, We
‑‑ You Know, We Called the Company as Well.

P. Graves: So What Can like The Film Commission Do If, Let\'s Say, Mary
or I Say this Company Did This, this and This? Is There Any Kind of
Clout or ‑‑ Can the Film Commission Put a Little Black Mark by Their
Name Or Something?

L. von Der Esch: I Don\'t Keep A Tick List of That Kind of Thing, but I
Do ‑‑ but We Do Talk to Each Other, but Anecdotally Let Me Give You an
Example. I Was Speaking in St. George, Which Is the Southern Most Part
Of the State of Utah. I Had a Movie Taking Place in Northern Utah. I
Mean, 50 Miles from the Idaho Border. I Got a Call from a Crew Person
Had That a Concern about Some Activities That the Film Was Doing. I Got
on a Plane Immediately and Because it Was Occurring and Still Occurring,
I Was Able to Get on a Plane, Go into a Trailer and Sit down and Say,
You Know, Maybe this Isn\'t What You Intended to Do. This Is What\'s out
There That They Think You\'re Going to Do. Why Don\'t We Talk about It.
And We Averted It. Because While it Was Occurring, We Got the Call and
I\'m More Than Happy to and I Know the Way My Other Fellow Film
Commissioners Work Around the United States, They Want ‑‑ They Want to
Be Able to Help You, and They Want to Be Able to Come In, But If We
Don\'t Know Bit until It\'s Well down the Road, We Can\'t Work Together.

C. Calamaio: Now, I Have a Question for You. I Mean, You Three Work with
All The Time. I Think Some of Our Training, Some of Our Viewers May Have
One, Two Permits a Year. Some of Our Other States. You Guys Because of
the Natural Resources Are in Areas Highly Used by the Motion Picture and
Television Industry. Where Can Some of Our Folks in Areas Where this Is
More of an Occasional Situation Find a Monitor? Do They Work Through
Their Film Commissions? The Industry? Do You Have Any Recommendations?

L. von Der Esch: Mary, Want To Take That? I Have Some Ideas.

C. Calamaio: a Feature Film Comes into an Area That\'s Never Had
Anything of That Scope Before. They Have to Deal with this for The First
Time. How Can They Get Monitoring Assistance?

M. von Koch: I Would Think Maybe Some of the Monitors That Are on Our
List Would Be Happy To Go Somewhere Else to Do Monitoring If They Felt
That They Could Learn about the Resources from the BLM Office And If ‑‑
I Guess If ‑‑ Their Costs Would Be Taken Care Of. Definitely We Have BLM
People That Know Their Resources and Are Probably Going to Be the Best
People to Monitor, Especially If You Don\'t Get this As Often Was We Do
and Do You Have the People Available to Do It.

L. von Der Esch: I Have an Example of an Experience with That. We Had a
Shortage of Monitors, We Had No Monitors In, I Believe It Was a Forest
Service Area a Couple of Years Ago with a Movie Called \"Meet the
Deetles.\" That Was Due to Either Maternity Leave or Vacations in July
and We Asked If it Would Be Ok to Go To Colorado to See If There Is
Anyone. The Forest Service Is Great to Work with in Their Film
Permitting, and They Have Lists Of People like Mary Does Who Are Retired
Forest Service People And the Company, Because They Wanted the Project
to Go Forward, Was Willing to Pay for Someone, as I Recall, That Came
Out of Colorado and Assisted in Utah.

C. Calamaio: Another Fax That Came in from Our Lands School, Susie and
this Is for Leigh. Pictures and Films like Mary Has Been Showing with Us
‑‑ Sharing With Us in this Broadcast Are a Good Tool for Training
Purposes. How Does the Film Industry Feel About the BLM Filming out on
the Set, and Are There Requirements That We Need to Keep in Mind?

L. von Der Esch: That\'s a Very Good Question. The Best Thing That You
Can Do Is Talk to the Location Manager. Most of the Time They\'re
Incredibly Cooperative with Your Filming the Filming, If You Will, but
Different Stars Have Different Contracts and Sometimes They Have What\'s
Called a Closed Set Which Means That No One but the Production Company
Is Allowed on Set for Specific Reasons. Even on a Closed Set, Someone in
An Official Capacity Such as Yourself Should Be Able to Visit. Many
Times a Big Company Will Have a Publicist with Them. If There Is a
Publicist, Ask the Location Manager, Could You Speak to Them and See
What the Possibility Is of Shooting Those Pictures. Again, I Think It\'s
Important to Go Back to What We Talked about Yesterday, Get to the Right
Person on Set, the Location Manager or Perhaps the Unit Production
Manager, and If You Want to Go Higher to the Producer, Certainly Talk to
Them About What Would You like to Do. And, Also, Your Film Commissioner
Can Make That Inquiry for You.

M. von Koch: I Would like to Add to That, Because I Have Been On
Location, and I Have Always Have a Camera or a Video Camera. The Key
Things Are to Let the Company Know That You Are There Taking Footage for
BLM Purposes Only. They\'re Always ‑‑ They\'re Very Concerned about Any
Footage Getting out into the \"\"Enquirer\"\" or One of Those Other ‑‑
What Do They Call Them ‑‑ Tabloids. What Happens I Was Trying to Think
Of. One Thing That\'s Really Different about Being on First Unit Is That
Your Key Actors, The Talent, Are ‑‑ They Have ‑‑ They Have Much ‑‑ They
Have Real Problem with People Actually Taking Pictures of Them on Set
Other than the Filming Company And I Respect and That Have Not Been
Taking Pictures That Actual ‑‑ That Would Show the Key Actors. But Other
than That, I Haven\'t Had Any Problems. I Was on Location Once Where
There Was an Accident and I Was Actually Filming at the Time.
Unfortunately, I Was Not Very Good with the Camera and Everything Was at
Wide Angle and It Really Didn\'t Show the Accident, but I Made it Very
Clear to Them That They Could View the Footage That I Had, but That Was
BLM Property and They Could Not Confiscate My Document, and So There
Wasn\'t a Problem.

C. Calamaio: We Got a Question That Came in from Wendy, and It\'s
Related to Nepa And Wanted to Know What the Film Industry Is Doing to
Educate the Industry on the Nepa Process on The Way the Federal
Government Does Business. Maybe Some of Your Film Commission to Film
Commission Communication Deals with This?

L. von Der Esch: Absolutely. We Have Had in the past ‑‑ We\'ve Had a Cup
of Instance ‑‑ Not a Come Instances, We Have for the Film Commission
Association a Yearly Event Called the Cineposium Which Is an Educational
and Discussion for Members Who Wish to Join Us to Talk about What\'s
Occurring in The Film Industry. We\'ve Had People from the Various
Agencies Speak There. I Was Host, If You Will, and Moderator on a Panel
about Filming on Public Lands in Two Other Instances by Our Association
of Film Commissioners at What\'s Called Our Locations Trade Show, Which
Is a Gathering of All the Film Commissioners at the L.a. Convention
Center, Typically in February, and it Is a Trade Show Where We All Show
‑‑ Obviously Market Our Areas and We Also Do Panel Discussions, and We
Have About 5,000 to 6,000 Members of The Industry Who Attend That Trade
Show, and We\'ve Had Discussions and Had Forest Service Representatives,
National Park Service and Also The BLM. Our Film U.s., Which Is a
Gathering of Specifically Film Commissioners from Around Our Country
Have Been Very Active in Supporting What Is Needed for Helping with this
Issue. I Have Testified on a Couple of The Bills That Would Help out a
Sister Agency, the National Parks Group, to Help Them Get Some Laws
Changed That Will Allow Them to Collect Site Rental Fees. So It\'s Our
Hope, and this Is a Step in Itself ‑‑ It\'s Our Hope That We Can
Continue to Hold Panel Discussions in Los Angeles. We Did it in New York
as Well, As I Recall, Chip, and We Hope We Can Continue to Educate the
Motion Picture Industry.

C. Calamaio: That Can Only Help in the Long Term. I Have Two More I Want
to Get to Quickly Before We Take Our Midday Break and this Is from
Charlie in Colorado. This Is Kind of a Technical Clarification. It\'s
Regarding Nora or Notice of Realty Action. I Heard Mary Say She Is Not
Doing Notice of Realty Action. Peter Said He Is Doing Federal Register.
Please Explain.

P. Graves: I Think That Was Basically Two ‑‑ Talking about Two Different
Things. We Have Never Had a Film Permit That We Had to Go to a Nora or
To a Notice of Realty Action, Into the Newspaper or Federal Register.
Most of Ours Are ‑‑ We Mitigate The Damage, and Even That One Had That
the Explosion, We Said That If They Do This, This, and This, We Will
Determine it as a Minimum Mull Impact Film Permit. So We Never ‑‑ for
Filming We Never Had to Go to the Federal Register or Newspapers for
30‑day Review. The Only Time We Put a Notice in The Newspaper Has Been
When We Released Our Environmental Assessment for Public Comment And
Review for the New Sites That Were Proposing or Developing for New Film
Sites And Locations in Our Area.

M. von Koch: and I Think That\'s the Same Thing That I Said, That Is
When We Go with Any Publications in the Newspaper, Was to Let People
Know That We Have an Environmental Assessment Available.

C. Calamaio: Thanks, Charlie, For Sending That In. One Little Quick One
Here Before We Go to Lunch. This Is from Janice in Barstow. I Know this
Is Something We\'re Going to Talk About. The Question Is for Peter, and
It\'s, Should We Allow Film Crews To Fuel Aircraft on Site?

P. Graves: That\'s Kind of a ‑‑ We\'re Going to Get into That A Little
Bit Later, But, Yeah, The Haz‑mat Issue, What We Have To Consider Is a
Big Consideration for Our Offices. I Know We Usually Do Not Allow Film
Crews to Refuel on Public Land. They Still Have to ‑‑ If They Are Going
to Land on Public Land, They Still Have to Provide Their Maintenance
Plans, like How They\'re Going to Land, Where They Are Going to Land,
How Often They\'re Going to Fly and Stuff like That

\> We Have Enough Airports Around the Ridgecrest Area, Little Airports
That They Could Probably Fly to Easily Enough That They Don\'t Need to
Refuel On Public Land, but If They Really Push the Issue, They Will Have
to Do Their Spill Contingency Plans and Stuff like That Before We Allow
Them, and Then Our Fire People and Our Haz‑mat Crew down in Riverside
Will Have to Look at That and Make Sure It\'s ‑‑ Complies with What We
Want and Those Requirements.

M. von Koch: I Can Respond to That as Well. In Our Area, We Do Not Have
More Than One Airport, and Some of Our Locations That Use the Helicopter
Are Rather Remote, Especially as Measured from the Airport, and So We
Have in the Past Allowed the Refueling to Take Place on Public Lands,
and It Has Been Handled as Hazardous Material Potential for the
Potential Spill of Petroleum Products.

C. Calamaio: I Think You All. We Do Have a Couple Faxes We\'re Going to
Hold until Our Final Session, Because They Are Going To Complement Some
Possible Extensive Discussion Related to The \"City Slickers\" Stampede
and The Whole Issue of Air Spaces. But for Now That Concludes Our
Morning Session on Nepa, the Decision Process, as Well as Compliance and
Monitoring. Now It\'s Time for That Lunch Break and So Again We\'re
Going To Be Going off the Air for About an Hour, Give You a Chance To
Grab a Bite and Get Ready for The Final Session on Reclamation. I Think
We\'ve Ordered in Chinese Food and We\'re Going to Tie up a Few Loose
Ends after Lunch Much. We Also Figure since You\'ve All Been Doing a
Great Job, You Deserved One Long Break Without An Exercise. So Enjoy.
Remember, When We Come Back, We\'ll Still Be Right Here on Satellite
Telstar 5, Transponder 12. There\'s a Lot More Coming Up. So Keep Those
Dishes Pointed Right Where They Are. Again, We\'ll Governor You a Short
Test Signal Before We Pick Things Up. See You in about an Hour.
Signatory.

C. Calamaio: Welcome Back. It\'s the Final Session of Our Film Permit
Training Course. Hope Odd Good Lunch. We Had Chinese Food. Mary\'s
Fortune Cookie Said She Would Have a Safe Trip, Which We Believe Means
That She\'ll Survive the next Hour of Live Television and Get Back to
the Red Rock Country in One Piece. In this Afternoon\'s Session We Will
Concentrate on Compliance, Again, Monitoring, Reclamation And the
Completion of the Permit Process. Again, I\'m Joined by Mary von Koch
from the Moab Field Office, Peter Graves from Ridgecrest and Leigh von
Der Esch, Our Executive Director of the Utah Film Commission. Welcome
Back Everyone.

L. von Der Esch: Thank You, Chip.

C. Calamaio: Now It\'s Time to Move to the Last Major Topic,
Reclamation. What Has to Happen Once the Cameras Stop Rolling? Mary?

M. von Koch: That\'s Right, Chip. As a BLMer, this Is One of the Most
Important Parts of the Film Permit Process. As a Rule, I like to Make
Sure That I Go to Each of the Filming Sites with the Location Manager
And Determine the Amount of Reclamation That Is Needed Once The Filming
Has Been Completed. More Often than Not, I like to Be Accompanied by Our
Natural Resources Specialist Who Has a Lot of Experience with the
Reclamation. One of the Key Things That We Do On Location Is to Prepare
a Plan For the Reclamation, and this Will Include the Methods That Are
Going to Be Used to Restore The Surface. This Could Be Raking Tracks or
Footprints, or it Could Be Mechanical Scarification. We Also Need to
Determine the Time Frame for this to Take Place and Also the Time Frame
For Reseeding If It\'s Going to Be Required. This Will All Tie into the
Stipulations of the Permit, but If You Recall, in Our Stipulations for
\"Far Beyond,\" We Left a Lot of this Open‑ended And Said That the
Reclamation Would Be Determined on Site Following the Filming
Activities. The Other Thing That We Need in The Plan Is to Include a
Measure For the Success of Reclamation So That We Can Then Release the
Bond When It\'s Appropriate. Documentation of the Condition Of Soils and
Vegetation Is Really Important by Way of Video And Still Images, and
Especially If it Was Started Before Production, Has Continued During
Production and Then after Production and During Reclamation. We Need to
Monitor the Status Until Satisfactory Reclamation Has Been Achieved. I
Think That Pretty Much Does it With the Compliance Part of the Process.
Now I Would like to Tie up the Loose Ends and Talk about the Eas and
Terminating the Permit. I Actually Mentioned Some of This When Maxine
Called this Morning, but There\'s Some Really Key Points, and I\'d like
to Go Back and Touch on These. If You Remember, When You Go Through the
Environmental Assessment Process, You Determine, Based on the Best
Information That You Have, What The Impacts Are Going to Be. You
Determine What Kind of Mitigating Measures Will Help to Decrease the
Impacts, and So Now That You Have the Information From Having Actually
Had this Activity on the Lands, Part of The Nepa Process Is to Go Back
And Do a Re‑evaluation. You Need to Decide How Well You Did in
Predicting What the Impact Were Going to Be, Whether The Stipulations
That You Formulated Were Good Stipulations, Did They Actually To What
You Had Intended Them to Do, and Could You Have Done Things in a
Different Way? All this Information from this Project Will Be Helpful to
You If You Have Future Projects of The Same Nature and Also for Doing
Cumulative Impact Sections Of Future Documents.

C. Calamaio: Ok. Well, You\'ve Done a Great Job, Mary, Tying up Those
Loose Ends. But What about the Company\'s Deposits, Fees, Bonds, You
Know, All of That Administrative, All The Accounting Issues, All That
Stuff, Tying All That Up, How Does That Really Come to a Conclusion?

M. von Koch: Let\'s Just Call The House Keeping Step and the Termination
of the Permit. The Company Likes to See this Happen as Fast as Possible
Because They Are Very Anxious to Wrap Everything up and Get Any Residual
Monies Back. So What We Need to Do Is Go Back, and Especially ‑‑ I\'m
Referring Especially to Projects That Have Full‑cost Reimbursement or
Advance Rental Collected. We Need to Go Back and See Which Locations the
Company Used. Remember That We Based on a Schedule, the Number of
Locations, the Number of People And the Actual Days That They Were Used.
Go Back and Determine What They Actually Owed Us, Whether They Need to
Submit Additional Fees Or Whether it Needs to Be Refunded, and That Goes
for Both The Rental and Their Cost Reimbursement Account. The One Thing
with the 5440 Account Is That We Need to Wait Until All of the Charges
Have Gone In. It Is an Account That\'s Set in Denver. So Generally It\'s
Going to Take Four to Six Weeks for Everything To Clear to Get a Balance
and Then Issue a Refund If It\'s Due. Hopefully We\'ve Done a Good Job
Of Predicting What Those Costs Are Going to Be and We Don\'t Have to Go
Back and Ask the Company for More Money, Although That Can Happen, and
They Do Need to Pay for All the Costs. For the Company, Another Very
Important Thing Is a Refund of Their Bond, and We Have Had Instances
Where We\'ve ‑‑ We\'ve Phased the Reclamation Bond So That at Certain
Stages, Say If They Had a Set Construction and The Set Has Been Removed,
We Would Have a Partial Release of The Bond. We Need to Keep Enough
Money on Hand, or Bond Security, to Cover The Additional Reclamation.

C. Calamaio: Some of That Can Go on for Months and Years, Can\'t It?

M. von Koch: it Definitely Can. I Think It\'s a Real Frustration To the
Companies but We Still Need Those Assurances. We Don\'t Need ‑‑ I Would
Say Some of the Accounting Stuff Should Go Faster, but it Generally
Doesn\'t. The Last Thing Is a Close‑out Memo for Our BLM Record. It Ties
up ‑‑ Again, We\'re Talking about Tying up Loose Ends. It\'s Good to
Have in the Case File a Summary of the Activities, Any Conclusions That
Were Reached, and There Is a Copy or an Example of a Closeout Memo in
the Student\'s Workbook In Appendix 1.32. Also the Filming Company Very
Often Would like to Have a Copy Of That Closeout Memo for Their Records.

C. Calamaio: Mary, I Would Like to Jump in Here and Mention To Our
Viewers That in a Few Minutes We\'ll Be Having Our Final
Question‑and‑answer Segment of this Course, So If You Have Some Burning
Questions Or an Experience Would You like To Share with Everyone, this
Is The Time to Do It, and We\'ve Got Some ‑‑ Plenty of Time Reserved. We
Have a Few Faxes Here, but Please Give Us a Call, Send Us Some Faxes.
But Before We Start That Dialogue, Mary, I Believe You Have Some Actual
Monitoring Footage That Would like to Share With Everyone?

I Do. We\'ve Been Following Our Two Case Studies of the Ark and the
Stampede for \"City Slickers Ii,\" So I Would like to Show You Some Of
the Footage after the Company Left to Show You Some Documentation of
Reclamation. This Is the Impact Zone Where The Ark Hit. It\'s Really
Hard to See That There\'s an Actual Depression Anywhere and Just Looking
Around, There\'s No Debris to Speak Of. There\'s Absolutely Nothing That
Would Let Anybody Know That this Area Was Covered with Debris a Couple
Days Ago. So Basically What We Have Here Is ‑‑ We Have Two Days after
the Filming Had Taken Place, the Area ‑‑ All the Improvements Were
Removed and All We Saw at That Point Was Just the Depression from the
Track. Seven Months Later We\'d Had Snow On the Ground and You Can See
That There Were ‑‑ There Was Even less of ‑‑ Evidence of What Had Been
up Here, and If You Recall, in Some of the Videos Before We Had an Ark
Here, We Had a Mini Staging Area. Considering What Had Been up Here,
this Is ‑‑ There Really Isn\'t Anything That\'s Left.

C. Calamaio: There\'s No Visible Remains, Is There?

M. von Koch:. And I Never Actually Was Able to See Where the ‑‑ an
Actual Impact Location for the Ark Hitting the Ground. And Here We Are
Seven Months Later, Even the Tracks from the Students Cleaning up the
Area Are Gone.

C. Calamaio: Looks Just like Some Animal Tracks There.

M. von Koch: That\'s Basically It.

C. Calamaio: Mary ‑‑ Here We Are, this Is \"City Slicker\" Right?

M. von Koch: One Month Later, What Had Taken Place, Remember That I
Mentioned We Had the Soils from the Stampede Area Were Basically like
Concrete. They Did Come in and Break That Up. The Seeding Didn\'t Take
Place For Several Months Because it Was the Wrong Time of Year. But Just
the Fact That You Get The Soil Scarified, If There Are Any Natural Seeds
That Are from The Remaining Vegetation, You Actually Do Start to Have
Some Reclamation That Takes Place.

C. Calamaio: We Had a Fax That Came in Earlier this Morning about That
Exact Site And this Whole Issue of the Horses on \"City Slickers,\" and
It\'s Kind of a Detailed Question. It Says ‑‑ What\'s BLM\'s Position
Towards the Film Company Which Did Not Do Full Disclosure of The Method
the Company Was Going To Use for the Wild Horse Sequence, I.e., Rather
than the Use of 100 Acres of Land Base, Which Would Spread That Impact,
Which He Understood ‑‑ this Person Understood Was What Was Analyzed,
That the Wild Horse Stampede Was Localized Between Those Fences,
Therefore, Magnifying the Impact to a Very Few Acres. By the Film
Company Not Doing Full Disclosure, BLM\'s Analysis Of the Environmental
Impacts Was Not Supportable by the Actual on The Ground Impacts, There
by the Nepa Document, the Term Here Was Lively Incorrect, and BLM Would
Not Be in Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act. This
Greatly Concerns Me of BLM\'s Partnership with Filming Companies That If
BLM Does Not Ask the Right Questions, the Film Industry Will Not Give
BLM The Details That We Need to Make Sure We\'re in Compliance with
Environmental Laws.

M. von Koch: That\'s a Very Good Question, and it Also Ties Into the
Time Frames That We\'ve Been Talking About. Because We Had to ‑‑ We Knew
That this Was Not Going to Be Minimum Impact, in Fact, 1993 Was Before
All of the Real ‑‑ This Determination of Minimum Impact Versus Not, Our
Tame Frames Were Still Such That the Company When it Came in with an
Application Was about Three Months in Advance of Filming. At That Point
in Time, They Still Did Not Have People on Their Staff That Actually Had
The Technical Knowledge of How They Were Going to Accomplish The
Stampede Scene. All They Knew Was That it ‑‑ it Was a Concept, That Was
What They Wanted to Do. They Didn\'t Know How They Were Going to Do It.
And That Wasn\'t Really Fine Tuned until We Were Well into The
Environmental Assessment Process, Probably in the Public Comment Period
and So it Wasn\'t ‑‑ I Don\'t Think They Were Talking about a Company
Not Providing Full Disclosure of Information. I Don\'t Think They Were
Hiding Anything. I Just Don\'t Think That at That Point in Time They
Knew How They Were Going to Do This, and I Think I Would Much Rather See
Reclamation on Six Acres than Having a Bigger Area ‑‑ You Know, He Did
Mention by Having The Fence it Concentrated the Impacts, and it Did.
I\'m Not Sure ‑‑ I Think If They Had Taken 10 Acres, or 15 Acres, You
Would Still Have Seen the Uprooted Vegetation in a Larger Area to Be
Reclaimed. I Do Want to Point out That We\'re Talking about a
Reclamation on Approximately Six Acres out of Land out of 1.8 Million
Acres We Manage, So We\'re Really Not Talking about a Very Large
Acreage. If You Look at Oil and Gas Pads, You Know, Those Add up as
Well. So it Probably Sounds Bad, You Know, this Is a Situation in Which
People Can Focus on Something Specific to Filming, But Back to the
Question from The Student, I Really Don\'t Think We\'re Talking about a
Situation Where the Company Did Not Provide Us the Information, And I\'m
Not Really Sure That Using the Worst Case Scenario Is Not a Valid Way of
Analyzing the Impacts.

C. Calamaio: Leigh, Some Thoughts on this about How Things Change
Between Concept And Rolling the Film.

L. von Der Esch: They Certainly Do, and the Important Thing Is You Give
Yourself Enough Time Obviously to Discover What\'s Going to Take Place.
But, Again, I Can\'t Stress Enough, this Is a Creative Industry, and
There Are Pages of Script Being Rewritten Overnight. I Think That You
Have to Be a Little Bit Flexible and Accommodating. One Thing That
Occurred to Me When Mary Was Speaking, Chip, Was the Fact That this Is a
New Event Every Day, Not Just for You, but for the Film Company. Mary,
You Deal with the Jeep Safari Every Year, and Your BLM Managers Deal
with Events That Take Place on a Regular Basis in Their Area and I Would
Imagine That after the End of Every Jeep Safari, You\'ve Learned
Something New about How to Manage That Different the next Year. You
Don\'t Have That Luxury. Every Single Day of Filming Is a New Event, Not
Just for You, but For Them, And, Again, I Think, Peter, I Would Hope You
Would Agree with Me, That the Malicious Intent Is Almost Nonexistent. I
Don\'t Think They Get up in the Morning and Think How They Can Go about
it in the Wrong Way. I Just Think That Because It\'s a Creative
Industry, the Fact That They Are Creating a New Event Every Day, Just ‑‑
Bring to the Table the Attitude That I Hope The Production Company
Brings to The Table, Which Is Let\'s Work Together on This.

C. Calamaio: Peter, Some Thoughts?

P. Graves: No, I Don\'t, Not Right Now.

C. Calamaio: I Guess Part of It Is That ‑‑ like You Say, Building That
Flexibility In, But Particularly with Stunts and Special Effects like
Mary Said, If You Plan for the Worst Case Scenario, You Are Probably
Going To Be in Good Shape down the Road.

M. von Koch: I Don\'t Know How Else to Look at It, Especially If You
Don\'t Have Previous Knowledge on What to Expect.

P. Graves: What Happens I Would Rather Prefer. If a Company Is Going to
Submit An Application, I Would Rather Have Them Give Us the Worst Case
Scenario, the Worst Kind of Impacts That We Have, Rather Than Give Us
the Minor Case That We Either Have to Amend or Change or Keep on Working
Witness. So I Would Rather Have the Worst Case Scenario. We Had a Van
Dame Film That Was Going to Blow up Ridgecrest Because They Had So Many
Pyrotechnics, but by the Time They Rewrote the Script, it Was Very
Minor. But it Was Better They Gave Us What They Intended to Do in the
Worst Case Scenario and Just Give Us We\'re Going to Use a Squib and
Blanks, but at the End, We\'re Going to Use All this Explosive. It Was
Better for Us to Review The Worst Case and Then Narrow Down Rather than
Get the Best Case and Work Back Up.

C. Calamaio: Kind of Wrapping Up the \"City Slickers Two\" Stampede,
What Is the Condition Of this Famous Six Acres as this Point in Time and
Did We Have Stipulations for Native Seed Mixture to Be Used in Terms of
Restoring the Vegetation?

M. von Koch: I Went Back and Visited the Site about Seven Months You A,
and I Was Actually Quite Surprise to Do See How Much Vegetation Has
Taken Root, Native Vegetation, Is a What I\'m Speaking About. There
Still Was, in Deed, a Fair Amount of Invader Species, Russian Thistle,
but it Was Nice To See Some of the Perennial Vegetation, Some Indian
Rice Grass Also Interspersed. We\'ve Closed Access to the Area Only by
Having a Sign up That Says, Please ‑‑ Suspend Travel Area Being Restored
or Something To That Effect and People Have Honored That, and I Think
That It ‑‑ You Know, We Said it Was Going to Take Eight to Ten Years
From the Time it Was Reseeded to Have the Native Vegetation Taking Over,
but I Do Think it Is Taking Place.

P. Graves: Are You Going to Keep Their Bond 8 to 10 Years?

M. von Koch:, No, I Actually Released the Bond about a Year Ago.

C. Calamaio: Kind of Going Back to the Topic We\'re On, the Issue of
Documentation, I Found It Interesting with the Technique You Use in the
Monitoring Footage During the Reclamation, the Narration You Do. You
Might Want to Talk to Our Students about That. It\'s a Way of Not Only
Getting a Visual Record, but You\'re Creating an Audio Record, Too, In
Describing What You\'re Seeing.

M. von Koch: That\'s Correct And with the Cameras Now That Actually Give
You the Date and The Time, it Really Is a Record For the Long Term and I
Will Have ‑‑ after I Take My Tapes Back, I Will Put Them into the File.

C. Calamaio: How Do You Tie The Tapes to the Administrative Record. The
Files We Could Get Still Photographs and Maps. How Do You Tie Your Are
Tapes to That Admin Record?

M. von Koch: I Have No Idea. I\'m Just Going to Stick it into The File
and Then When I Retire It Will Just Be There.

C. Calamaio: Ok. That Works. We Have a Question That Came In, And I\'m
Going to Jump in at this Point with this Question. Is There Ever an
Instance Where BLM Can Waive Application Monitoring And/or Rental Fees
For Minimum Impact Applications From Nonprofit Organizations Conducting
Documentary Types of Filming? This Was from Mary in Winnemucca.

P. Graves: under ‑‑ Do You Want ‑‑

M. von Koch: Go Ahead, Peter.

P. Graves: under 2920s We\'re Not Allow to Do Waive Fees. I Think ‑‑
Usually Fees Are Broken down Between Commercial And Noncommercial, but
If They Cannot Fit under like a Noncommercial Activity, Which Is Like a
Student Film Permit, or Under Casual Use, We Cannot Waive Fees, and
That\'s ‑‑ Would Include Rental and Application Fees. Am I Correct on
That?

M. von Koch: I Think There Is The Opportunity for a Waiver Since the Fee
Structure Does Tie Into the 2800 or Rights‑of‑way Regulations, but I
Believe it Has to Go to ‑‑ for State Office Approval, State Director. If
We\'re Wrong, Somebody Will Let Us Know.

P. Graves: or Let Us Know Which One Is Right.

M. von Koch: Well, I Do Nope The 2920 Fees Do Tie into the 2800
Regulations and it Does Have the Provision for Waivers There.

C. Calamaio: Mary, Last Comments on Cumulative Impacts And Kind of as
We\'re Going Through this What We\'re Learning And How That Can Affect
How We Deal with Future Projects?

M. von Koch: I Just Feel like There\'s a Wealth of Information As You Go
Through a Project, and You Definitely Need to Go Back And Evaluate Each
Project and in The Future Look Back and See What Has Been Done and Use
That Information for Future Projects.

C. Calamaio: Ok. Very Good. Well, this Is It, Gang. Your Last Chance to
Call in with Questions for Our Instructional Team about Anything That
We\'ve Covered over the past Two Days. Or Perhaps You Have Some Film
Permitting Experiences from Your Area That Would You like to Share. To
Protect the Guilty or the Innocent, Please Keep the Name Of Your Film
Companies Anonymous. I\'d Also like to Say That Some Of Our Viewers from
Other Agencies, of Some Individuals From the Other Film Commissions, We
Would Love to Hear from You. First We Have Again from Our Lands Class
Upstairs, a Question For Mary. Back to Our Hot Topic, the \"City
Slickers Two\" Feature and the Question Is What Was the Approximate
Value of Cost Reimbursement along with Reclamation for \"City Slickers
Two\", for Something like That?

M. von Koch: If I Remember Correctly, the Number That Comes Into My Head
Is about \$26,000 And I Think That Was for Rental And Also for Cost
Reimbursement, Because They Were in Our Area For Approximately Two
Months.

C. Calamaio: Is That in Line, Leigh, with Things You Say for Other
Projects of That Scope?

L. von Der Esch: Yes, I Think It Is. We Were All Learning on this One,
Because it Had Been a While Since Anything Had Been down in That Area
That Was Going to Have This Much Activity on the Land.

M. von Koch: Oh, No, this Was Right Behind \"Geronimo.\"

L. von Der Esch: I Try to Forget That One. That\'s the One We Learned
On.

M. von Koch: City Slickers Went Very Smoothly Following \"Geronimo.\"

L. von Der Esch: I Stand Corrected. It Was Reasonable, Then.

C. Calamaio: Back to Our Issue of Airspace and the Dialogue We\'ve Been
Having with Suzanne up in Prineville and I Would like to Read the Fax
She Sent In. The Most Recent Fax She Sent In, She Said That Basically
the Faa, The Federal Aviation Administration, Controls All Airspace,
That the Forest Service and That BLM Has Basic Regulations Within Our
Organizations for the Rule of Thumb for Our Flights. Both Fixed Wing
Aircraft and Helicopters. The Park Service Requests That We Don\'t Fly
below 2500 Feet Over a National Park, but it Is Not in the Faa
Regulations. The BLM and Forest Service Can Request, Because of Wildlife
Concerns, for Example, Bald Eagle Nesting Areas, That in the
Stipulations ‑‑ but Unless They Have a Tfr, Which I Believe Is Temporary
Flight Rules, We Don\'t Control Airspace. She Says There Are Several
Manuals That Can Be Used and a If a Fill Permit Is Necessary to Have a
Temporary Flight Rule or Tfr, the Best Place to Go Is to Your Local
Dispatch Office and Visit with Your Aircraft Desk And Said They\'re a
Great Resource. I Don\'t Know ‑‑ That Seems like Some Very Helpful
Information. Good Words of Advice. We Have a Question from Lynn, Who I
Believe Is Upstairs. I Understand up Front Changes to The Film Company
Were Not Refundable, Thus What Fees, Rentals, et Cetera, Can Be
Refunded? Up Front Charges. I Understood up Front Charges to Film
Companies Were Not Refundable, Thus, What Fees, Rentals, et Cetera Can
Be Refunded?

L. von Der Esch: That\'s a Good Question.

P. Graves: the Only Thing That\'s Refundable ‑‑ or Nonrefundable Is the
Application Fee, the \$125 Application Fee That They Submit under
Category 1 Is Usually the Only Thing That Is Not Refundable. If They Pay
Rent and Obviously If They Say We\'re Going to Be Here Three Days and
They\'re Here For Two Days, the Extra Day of Rent Should Be Refunded,
Bonds And Monitoring Fees, If It\'s Not All Used Up.

M. von Koch: and the Other Category Would Be If You Do Have A Full Cost
Reimbursement Account and They\'ve Deposited Into the Account, and We
Have Charged Against it and There Is A Balance, Then We Do Refund the
Balance for That Project Specific Account.

C. Calamaio: One for Leigh From Susie with the Lands Academy. It Says,
Leigh, It\'s Been Good To Hear Your Insight from the Film Industry\'s
Point of View But What Changes Do You See Coming How We May Do Business
Today?

L. von Der Esch: That\'s a Great Question. Susie, I Think the Digital
World Is Going to Affect How You\'re Doing Business Today Because It\'s
Going to Affect How We\'re Doing Business. It\'s Going to Affect How the
Industry Is Doing Business, Chip. From What We Can Tell, it Will Change
the Crew Size a Bit Because the Equipment Is Different. One of the
Things That Film Commissions Are Doing and I Note I Wrote a Note to
Myself Earlier, We\'re on the Internet Providing Our Information. I Know
Some of the Other Agencies Are Trying to Go Online With Film Permitting
So That They Can Draw down on a Website. Mary, Are You in That Position
Now, the Preapp Information Can Be Pulled out from the Internet?

M. von Koch: Right. They Can\'t Complete the Form and Send it Back
Through the Internet to Us, but They Can Download the Information.

L. von Der Esch: And, I Have\' Been Harping for Days about How This
Industry, Time Is Money, And We as Film Commissioners Are Delivering Our
Location Libraries Now on the Internet. So We Used to Break down a
Script, Go out and Shoot the Photos and Paste Them Together And Then
Mail Them to the Production Companies in Los Angeles or Around the
World. Now We\'re Storing Them on Our Own Libraries on the Internet And
We\'re Talking Back and Forth, and Actually it Should Help Us All Do
Business Because If Someone from a Foreign Country Is Online with Us and
We Are Showing Them BLM Land, We Can Talk about it Right Then and There
When We\'re Location Scouting Right on the Internet What Difficulties or
What the Permitting Process May Be and What Time They Need to Allow as
They Start to Create Whatever They Need for Their Project. So I Think
the Future Offers Us A Lot of Things and I Think Hopefully it Will Make
Us or ‑‑ Our Jobs Easier.

C. Calamaio: I Have Kind of a Perspective. You Know, the Little
Camcorder I Used to Use to Tape My Kids\' Birthday Parties, the
Professional Digital Equipment Is Getting That Small and I Think in
Terms of These Issues Of People in Trespass, People Going out on Public
Lands Conducting Commercial Activities Without a Permit, and Also People
Just in Terms of the Recreational Use of Individual August Raw Fee, this
Is Kind of Going to Be Blurring in the Future and May Offer Some
Interesting Challenges for Us in Terms of Additional Grey Areas.

L. von Der Esch: Look at the Copyright Issues. National Parks We\'ve
Been Discussing the Fact That If They Want to Put an Suv Running up The
Side of the Statue of Liberty Digitally, Where Does The Copyright Come
From? And If There Is Someone ‑‑ We Looked at this with Houses. With
Somebody Goes into a Neighborhood, Takes a Picture of A House and Drops
it at the Background for an X‑rated Film. It Could Be I Saw Your House
Last Night in an X‑rated Film. And Then, as You Say, What If Someone
Goes out and Makes a Film That They Turn into a Contest and it Wins a
Lot of Money? A Lot of Grey Areas That Are Coming Up. So I Think the
More We Dialogue About These Things, the Better Off We\'ll All About.

C. Calamaio: Peter, You Mentioned Student Films. A Lot of People Don\'t
Just Realize They\'re in Trespass or Violation and Students Get an
Assignment for a Project and They Get a Camera, And, Gee, There\'s Just
this Empty Desert, Let\'s Go out and Make a Movie. Like the Rock Videos
We See in Tv. How Is Your Office Dealing with That?

P. Graves: Our Office Deals With Student Films in the Sense That Most of
the Time We like Have the Student Come in and I Think like in Their
Courses, I Can\'t Say, Because I Never Took A Student Film Course, but
They Do Have Something Where They Can Learn What They Can and Cannot Do
on Public Land or What the Permitting Process Is. Because They\'re
Noncommercial, We Don\'t Usually Require Them to Have a Permit, but What
They Do Need from Us Is an Authorization Letter, but They Have to Submit
To Us like What They Plan to Do, A Letter from the School That They Are
in ‑‑ this Is a Student Project and That Student Is in Good Standing
with the School And Then an Insurance Certificate, like the Companies
Do, from the School. Like ‑‑ Unfortunately, like a Lot of the Final
Students That Come out to the Public Land and Don\'t Follow the Process,
They\'re the Ones That Usually Get in Trouble, and like Two Years Ago We
Cited at Least Five Student Film Companies That Were Driving in
Wilderness and Started Fires on Public Lands. The Schools Do Have to
Take Accountability of Their Students And Basically Tell Them the
Process. Do You Have Any Comments on That?

L. von Der Esch: No, I ‑‑ We Try to Work with Our University And I Think
That\'s a Good Point, Peter. I Think We Could Do Better in Terms of
Working with the Universities in Our Area and Talking to Them about ‑‑
Asking For a Location Class with the Young Student Film Maker and Bring
Someone in like Mary as Well as the Film Commissioner to Talk to the up
and Coming Student Film Makers and Say, You\'re Going to Want to Use
Locations, So Here\'s the Etiquette, If You Will, for Going on Location.

P. Graves: I Know like the Ridgecrest Film Commission, When They Get a
Student Film Company, They like to Make Them Go Through the Process.
This Is the Permit. This Is How You Have to Fill it Out. This Is What
You Get to Do. They May Not Submit the Permit To Me, Because Then I Have
to Authorize It, but this Is What ‑‑ Make Them Know How to Do the Paper
Work, and I Think That\'s Helping a Lot of the Student Film Companies
Coming to Ridgecrest Right Now.

L. von Der Esch: That\'s a Great Idea.

C. Calamaio: Here Is One from The Las Vegas Nevada Field Office. He Says
in Vegas Exempt Educational Purpose Filming from Rental Fees ‑‑ this Is
Kind of What They Do and Is That Something at the Discretion of The
Local Management?

P. Graves: I Guess.

M. von Koch: I Would Say That\'s One of Our Grey Areas, And If It\'s ‑‑
If it Is Commercial, I Believe That the Fact That It\'s Educational Is
Immaterial. We Have an Educational Channel. We Have Bbc, Pbs, and There
Is ‑‑ There Can Be Nonprofit, They Can Be Educational and It\'s Still a
Commercial Production. So We Ask Enough Questions to Make That
Determination, You Know, Whether We\'re Talking About Commercial or
Noncommercial and If it Is Commercial, They Been We Do Require a Permit.

C. Calamaio: but the Full Monetary Value Is Required by Flpma, Correct?

M. von Koch: Yes.

C. Calamaio: Wendy Upstairs With the Lands Academy Says, Is There Going
to Be Some Type of Book or Manual for Film Permitting That Would Be
Conducive for the Forest Service, the Park Service, BLM, Other Natural
Resource Agencies Such as the Communications Site Manual? And this
Probably Is Tied to Our Changing Regulations.

M. von Koch: I\'m Not Sure About the Other Agencies or Whether There
Would Be a Collaborative Effort or Not. But My Guess Is That as Soon as
The New 2920 Regulations Are Signed That a Handbook Would Be Close
Behind.

L. von Der Esch:, Actually as A State Person, I\'ll Jump into a Federal
Issue Here. But I Have on Several Occasions Now Gone to Washington to
Chat With National Parks Conservation, National Park Service, the Forest
Service Has Been Included. Actually, the Rental Fee Schedule That You
Put up Earlier, Mary, Has Been Pulled Together by the Forest Service And
Is What They\'re Using. My Understanding, Chip, from What I\'ve Heard in
Washington, Is That There Is a Desire to Get Consistency, Understanding
That Your Mandates Are Different, but That the Rental Fees, Cost
Recovery Fees and All Those Will Be Consistent. Certainly Those of Us
Who Have Been Supporting the Legislation On a National Level to Allow
for National Parks to Have Site Rental Location Fees Be Kept in Their
Area like the Reclamation Use Program for the Biking in Moab, That\'s
What We Would like To See. I Think it Would Help Our Film Makers Greatly
If the Agencies Within the Confines of the Mandate Could Be as
Consistent As Possible in How They Administer That.

C. Calamaio: I See We Had a Little Note, a Scribble in the Corner of
That Fax, from Some of Our Behind the Scenes Experts Saying at this
Point, However, Nothing Is Plan Pending the Regs.

L. von Der Esch: We\'re Working on It, That\'s for Sure.

C. Calamaio: Peter?

P. Graves: No.

C. Calamaio: While We\'re Pausing, We Have from Vernal ‑‑ There Is
Definitely a Utah Theme Going Through this Show. Peter in Vernal, and
He\'s Got a Question about Permits. Good Afternoon, Peter.

Caller: Good Afternoon. Hello, Marrow. ‑‑ Hello, Mary. How Many Film
Permits Were Issued out of Moab the Last Few Years, and of Those ‑‑
Excuse Me, of Those Applied For, How Many Were Actually Denied and For
What Reason?

M. von Koch: I ‑‑ Let\'s See. Let\'s Go Back about Five Years, Since You
Said in the Last Five Years. I ‑‑ Few Years. I Would Say Our Average Has
Been 45 to 50 Permits per Year. We Have Not Denied Any Applications We
Have Denied the Use of One Location and That Was The Rectory, Which I
Mentioned Earlier, with Respect to Filming At Castle Rock. Other than
That, We Discourage People from Using Certain Locations. We\'ve
Definitely Worked with Companies to Try to Meet Minimum Impact Criteria,
and Sometimes That Results in Them Tiering Back Their Proposals or
Looking At Different Alternatives for Their Locations, but Not ‑‑ That
One Denial Is the Only One I Can Think Of.

Caller: Thank You Very Much.

M. von Koch: Thanks, Peter.

C. Calamaio: I Had One Note, Kind of Keeping Tracks of Odds And Ends,
and the Last Little Note Night My Bin Was in Terms Of Monitoring, Mary
and Peter, When You Have First and Second Unit Activity on the Same Day,
Maybe 60 Miles of Dirt Road Apart, Alternatives for Monitoring?

M. von Koch: I\'ll Go Ahead And Take That One. With Our Third Party
Monitoring Program, That Really ‑‑ it Has Opened up a Lot of Avenues for
Us. We Definitely Want to Have a Monitor on Site for Both Units,
Regardless of Whether They\'re One Mile Apart or 50 Miles Apart. When
We\'re Looking at Big Films, We Try to Have BLM People as Much as
Possible. One of the Things That\'s Interesting Is on Our List of
Monitors We Have Two or Three Individuals Who Are Also Seasonal
Employees for the BLM. So We\'re Actually Able to Use Our 5440 Account
and Let Them Charge Against It, So That Has Opened up a Little Bit More
of a Window of Available Monitors for Us. I Guess in Answer to the
Question, We Do Want to Have Somebody with the Companies, Regardless of
Whether They\'re ‑‑ They\'re at Two or Three Sites at The Same Time, and
We Try and Cover it However We Can.

C. Calamaio: Peter, Is That An Issue in the California Desert?

P. Graves: Right Now We Haven\'t Had That Problem Yet. But We Would
Probably Duty Same Thing and Request ‑‑ If They\'re At Two Sites on
Public Land, Let\'s Say at the Pinnacles First Unit and the Dry Lake Bed
for The Second Unit, We Would Probably Have Them at Both Sites.

C. Calamaio: We Have a Question from Cindy and Craig Directed to Mary
and These Folks Under Montrose. They Want to Know the Authority To Be
Decided for Issuing a Letter for Authorization for Filming?

M. von Koch: I Don\'t Know That There Is an Authorization. It\'s Not a
Legal Document. All it Is Something That We\'ve Put Together in Our
Office So That the Person That\'s Holding The Letter of Authorization
Can Show That They Have Indeed Coordinated with Our Office and We Have
Acknowledged Them Being There.

P. Graves: That\'s the Same Reason We Do It, Too, for Student Film
Companies, Is That We Have a Lot of the Companies Who Want to Have
Something in Their Hand So If the Law Enforcement or ‑‑ it Could Be
Anyone, Chp, California Highway Patrol, County or State or BLM, Stops
and Asks Them What Are They Doing, We Have this Letter. Sorry, We Talked
to Peter ‑‑ It\'s Just Protection for Them And It\'s Nothing in the
Regulations to Say We Have to Do It, but It\'s ‑‑ I Know Mary and I Seem
to Be Doing it Just to Give the Company Some Ease.

M. von Koch: and Ourselves. And We like to Know They\'re There.

P. Graves: So I Don\'t Get Called at 6:00 in the Morning on Saturday.

C. Calamaio: Cindy and Craig, We Appreciate You Sending That In. We Have
a Percentage Question. I\'m Going to Ask this Question Of Peter and Mary
First and Then I\'m Going to Ask the Same Question to Leigh. It Will Be
Interesting to See What the Perspective Is from the Different Sides of
the World. What Percentage of Your Work Time Is Spent on Filming
Permits? Peter?

P. Graves: about 25% Right Now.

C. Calamaio: Mary?

M. von Koch: I Would Say It\'s Closer to 30%.

C. Calamaio: That\'s Our BLM Litmus Test. Leigh von Der Esch, How about
Your World?

L. von Der Esch: We Don\'t Permit, but ‑‑

C. Calamaio: Bullpen Piece of Your World ‑‑

L. von Der Esch: It\'s Pretty All Consuming. How Many Hours There Are in
a Week? I Think it Takes up Every One of Them. We Have Basic
Responsibilities To the ‑‑ Our Positions in Government, Too, in Terms of
the Percentage of Work That We Do That Is Simply Marketing Our Area and
Attracting the Industry Into Utah and I Would Say Probably Our Marketing
Efforts Are Probably, Oh, 25% of Our Budget, 50% Is Actually the
Location Scouting and Working Hands On. I Have Three People That Work
Very Competently in My Office Doing the Location Scouting, and Hang On,
Peter, in Vernal, Someone Is on Your Way Right Now As We Speak to Do
Some Location Scouting out There. So It\'s Probably 25 Marketing, 50%
Serving the Producer, and Another 25% from a Myriad of Duties, Anywhere
from Helping Someone Get a Script into an Agent\'s Hands to Helping a
Group Who Needs Publicity or Pr, to Helping a Young Film Maker Try To
Figure out What He Needs to Do with the Screen Actor\'s Guild. So it Is
a Challenging and Diverse Job, Chip. No One Ever Said it Was Boring.

M. von Koch: I Think I Would Like to Say Something with Respect to this
Percentage. Because a Lot of Our Viewers Are Realty Specialists, and We
Have A Number of Different Kinds of Authorizations That We Work ‑‑ I
Think That\'s Why this Question Came Up, and I Am the Primary Realty
Specialist in My Office, And as I Mentioned Before, I Do Work Part Time,
but I Still Have To Do Things like Rights‑of‑way, Sales, Exchanges,
Withdrawals And So Filming Is Just One of The Things That I Do. I Don\'t
Work Exclusively on Filming. And it Does Definitely Require Having to
Budget Time and Set Priorities and I\'m Glad You Asked the Question.

C. Calamaio: it May Only Be 20 or 30% of Your Regular Life, But I Can
till for the Last Two Days, You Guys Have Been Doing 150% Right Here.
This Is a Great Question from Our Lands Class Upstairs, and They Say,
How Do BLM Film Permit Fees Compare to Fees Charged by Private
Landowners? Is this Pushing Film Makers to Use Public Lands Before Using
Other Sources? Are We a Screaming Deal or Are They Paying More on
Private Lands? Leigh, You Probably Have a Great View of this One.

L. von Der Esch: That\'s a Very Good Question. I Think It\'s the Process
That Would Be Pushing People from Your Area to Private Land More Than
the Fees. I Think There Are Real Comparabilities. When You Talked about
the 26,000, Kind of Caught Me Flat‑footed, but I Was Having a Blond
Moment. But That\'s Not to Be Forgotten. When You Ask Me about the
26,000 For the \"City Slickers Two\", Was That Comparable, I Was Kind Do
Having a Rolodex, You Know, for A Regular Company, That Was on Private
Land in Salt Lake City And Shooting a Full Two Months, That Would
Probably Be a Comparable Figure. So I Think That What We\'re up Against
as Film Commissioners Is The Fact That this Industry Is So Mobile and So
Global, and We Have Countries That Are Giving Their Public Lands for
Free. Now, That Doesn\'t Mean That They\'re Wholesale Doing Away With
Their Environmental Considerations. It\'s Just That Their Governments
Feel That the Industry Is Important Enough That They\'re Willing to
Waive the Fees and Eat the Costs of What it Takes To Pay for the Peters
and the Mary von Koches and Processing Out of Their Own Internal
Budgets. So We Support the Fact That You Are Recovering Your Costs. I
Know How Difficult it Is. I Am a User of Our Public Lands. I Have ‑‑ I
Shouldn\'t Admit it ‑‑ an Suv Vehicle That I Drive.

M. von Koch: You\'re Not a Camper ‑‑

C. Calamaio: this Is Not a Digital Suv with Real Mud?

L. von Der Esch: I Love to Camp, Hike, I Have a Mountain Bike and I Know
over the Years I Have Been Using the Lands in the Utah That the
Percentage of People Throughout, 20 Years Ago I Did an Outward Bound
Type Program in Southern Utah and in 30 Days I Never Saw Anyone Except
the Group I Did it With. I Did it Again 15 Years Later, I Went One Week
Without Seeing Another Human Being. I Couldn\'t See One Day Today. So I
Know the Work Your People Are up Against, the Resources You Have.
Collect the Fees. I Think It\'s Been Reasonable, And I Hope We Can Work
on That.

C. Calamaio: I Think Also Kind of a Sidebar to That Issue Is in Terms of
in Some Cases It\'s Not Apples to Apples. There Are Some Things on the
Public Lands in Terms of Some of The Resource Values and Some of The
Spectacular Scenery and Some Of the Things We Have, in Essence, to Offer
the American People Through the Filming Industry That Does Not Exist on
Private Land.

L. von Der Esch: it Does Not. It Is Not Apples to Apples.

M. von Koch: Another Thing, Too, Is We Have a Filming ‑‑ a Rental
Schedule and Cost Reimbursement Schedule for Filming on Public Lands,
and I Think in Our Area the Private Individuals Use That as a Basis For
Establishing What They\'re Going to Charge, and I\'m Not Exactly Sure,
but I Believe That Our State Fees Are Similar to Ours as Well.

L. von Der Esch: I Think You\'re, Right, Mary.

C. Calamaio: We Are Going to Gallop Through a Few Others Here Pap
Question from John and I Think this Also Came from Our Lands Academy,
Said You Mentioned Earlier Monitoring by The Spca Was Included as a
Stipulation for Permit of Films Using Animals. Does BLM Have Any Kind of
Official Relationship with the Spca and Are There Any Regulations That
Cover the Humane Treatment of Animals?

P. Graves: Yes, the BLM Doesn\'t Have Any Written Document I\'m Aware of
with the American Humane Society, but We Do Have ‑‑ but the American
Humane Society Does Have Some Written Guidelines Which Covers Every
Animal, Including Insects, That Are Used on Site. If Would You like That
Kind of Information, I Have That Back in Ridgecrest. I Thought it Was
Part of the Course Materials, but to My Chagrin, I Noticed it Wasn\'t.
So I Do Have That Back in Ridgecrest If People Would Want To See What
Kind of Requirements The American Humane Society Has While They\'re
Monitoring Film Permits.

L. von Der Esch: Film Commissioners Have a Relationship, the Association
of Film Commissioners International, Has a Relationship with the
American Humane Society. They Were at Our Trade Show at The L.a.
Convention Center with A Booth this Year Talking to the Film Makers as
They Came Through Our Trade Shows Talking Also With the Film
Commissioners. From the American Humane Society We Receive in Our Office
a Fax Asking Us What Projects Are in The Area and Who Will Be Using Any
Type of Animals and So There Is a Lot of Dialogue to Cover That Base.

C. Calamaio: Ok. Well, this Was ‑‑ this Is Kind Of Nice. I Was Handed
this Fax, Thinking It Was a Question, and Actually It\'s a Bit of an
Endorsement. It\'s a Statement from the Inland Empire Film Commission in
Barstow Office Saying Great Job. Maybe We Should Go out While We\'re on
Top. The Voices in My Ear Are Telling Me There Is a Few More Faxes
Coming in the Back Door Right Now, So We\'ll Hold a Second.

P. Graves: You Shouldn\'t Listen to Those Voices in Your Head.

C. Calamaio: We Have a Few More Minutes to Go. I Think That the ‑‑ One
of the Points That We Made Throughout This Course and I Think ‑‑ Leigh,
You Made Some Comments When We Were off the Air, the Fact this Is an
Industry, and We Talked about Accidents, We Talked about Safety, We
Talked About the Regulations and Attitudes and the Fact That We Need to
Not Lose Sight of That, That We Are Permitting an Industry, like Some of
Our Other Commodity and Recreation Industries, on Public Lands, and We
Need to Keep That Spin on Things.

L. von Der Esch: I Think You Do. I Think You Also Need to Keep The Spin
on the Fact That Those That Are Being Employed by this Industry Are
Taxpayers. And I Know We Feel Our Office Is Successful and I Think Other
Film Commissions Have Done Absolutely Fabulous Jobs in Their Job for
Their Areas and It\'s Important to Them That They Have Local Hires, and
It\'s Not Only the People That Are Brought In with a Movie Company That
Pay Taxes, but It\'s People Who Are Living There. We Consider this a
Resource Sustaining Activity. We Can\'t Have the Resource Be Damaged or
Lose the Beauty of The Resource and Continue to Have Our Jobs. I Mean,
We\'re Marketing a Resource We Want to Take ‑‑ Our Philosophy in Our
Office Is and Granted it Doesn\'t Happen 100% Of the Time, Is Take Only
a Photo When You Leave, and Leave Nothing Else Behind.

C. Calamaio: and I\'m Not Making this Up. This Just Came in the Fax
Machine. Is There Any Truth to the Room You Are That Chuck Is Working on
A Sequel to \"Far Beyond\"? I\'m Not Making this Up. Actually Had Chuck
on the Phone. He May Secretly Be Working on a Sequel to \"Far Beyond,\"
Because Currently He Is Unemployed and He Is Having a Hard Time Making
Payments on That Kia and We Begged Him Not To.

M. von Koch: Poor Chuck.

C. Calamaio: under the Category Starting to Wrap Things Up, Do You Have
Any Final Thoughts to Leave.

P. Graves: I Would like to Thank Everyone for the Great Participation.
Everyone Has Heard or Experienced Film Crew or Hoer You Are Stories but
There Are Just as Many Stories Surrounding The BLM. The this Provides a
Network of Individuals You Can Contact If You Have Questions Regarding a
Proposed Activity. The End Result Will Be the BLM\'s Field Offices Will
Have a More Uniform, Efficient And, as Leigh Stressed Yesterday,
Consistent Film Programs. But in the End, I Would like to Leave a Quote
from the North Dakota Supreme Court and That Is ‑‑ \"Be Respectful but
Also Have Self‑respect.\" Chip?

C. Calamaio: Thank You, Peter. Leigh, Any Last Points You Would Like to
Make with ‑‑ from the Industry Hat or the Film Commission Hat?

L. von Der Esch: I Was Just Adjusting My Earpiece and Also Adjusting My
Hats. Thank You, Peter, for Bringing Up Again the Consistency. I Think
the Fact That We\'re a Little Inconsistent about the Site Rental Fees,
New Mexico Asked the Question on a Fax Today, Needs to Be Clarified, And
We Hope We Can Resolve That. The People That Come into Your Office Want
Clarity in Terms of What Your Process Is. Obviously We Would like it to
Be As Expedition Dish Us as You Can Do it Given the Fact That You Have a
Mandate to Protect the Land That You\'re Managing. I Mentioned Just a
Minute Ago They\'re Taxpayers, Too. And Also That this Is an Incredibly
Competitive Industry For U.s. Film Commissioners Right Now. Our Lands
Are Unique, and We Certainly Appreciate Them, Mexico and Australia and
Canada Are Offering Great Enticements To Attract this Very, Very Big
Industry, and it Employs Your Local People and I Hope You Keep In That
Mind. One of the Things I Would like To Say, Certainly I Can\'t Stress
Enough, Let\'s Continue this Dialogue. I Think It\'s Really Important
For Each of to You Get to Know Your Film Commissioner in Your Area. I
Appreciate Mary, and I Can\'t Say it Enough and I Hope I Can Express it
to the People in Price and Kanab and Vernal and Certainly the Bonneville
Salt Flats, it Was 140 Million Dollars to Our State Last Year, Over
\$145 Million, Actually, and That Couldn\'t Have Occurred Without the
Cooperation of the Forest Service and the National Park and Certainly
the BLM. Let\'s Get Together Some More. We Live in the Area. We Love It.
We Want to Work with You and See What We Can Do to Help You. And Thanks,
Chip, to Your People Here. It\'s Been an Absolute Pleasure. I Won\'t
Take Katie Couric\'s Job, But I Did Get Through the Two Days. I Think
It\'s Great That You Include in an Industry Rather Than Kind Do Having
it in a Vacuum. I So Much Appreciate It.

C. Calamaio: That\'s Because That\'s the Way it Works on the Ground.
Mary, Any Final Thoughts Would You like to ‑‑ Wisdom Would You Like to
Impart?

M. von Koch: Actually, I Do. When We Designed this Course, We Had Some
Goals in Mind. One, We Wanted to Provide Our Students with Training and
the Tools So That You Would Be Able To Process Film Permits. And,
Secondly, We Wanted to Work Towards Consistency Bureauwide In the Way
That We Process Film Permits and Also How We See When A Permit Is
Required. If in the Last Two Days We Have Achieved These Goals, Then I
Think That this Has Been a Successful Broadcast. I Would like to Thank
the People Who Have Joined Us for this Broadcast, and I Would Especially
like to Thank the NTC Crew Behind this Dialogue Scene Who Made the Magic
Happen.

C. Calamaio: Thanks, Mary. Like Your Fortune Cookie Said, We Hope You
Have a Safe Trip Home. And I Would like to Thank Again Mary, Peter and
Leigh for All The Hard Work They Did Developing this Broadcast and The
Student Workbook. That Was Actually More Work, I Think, than the
Television Show. I Would Also like to Mention That There Is Contact
Information for All of Our Instructors and Some of Our Washington Office
Specialists in The Workbook. Right up Front Before the Table Of
Contents. So If You Have a Follow‑up Question or an Issue Involving a
Film Permit That You Would like To Discuss in Detail, Hey, Just Please
Pick up the Phone and Give Them a Call. As They Say in Hollywood, It\'s
a Wrap, and That about Wraps it up For Our Film Permit Training Course.
Remember, Everyone Needs to Complete the Course Evaluation, Which Is
Located in the Back of Your Book. You Will Have Also Received this
Evaluation by E‑mail. In the Last Two Days. If You Can Either Send the
Hard Copy in My Mail to the Address Listed on the Evaluation, or Respond
to ‑‑ We Would like to Remind All Our BLM Satellite Downlink
Coordinators to Complete the Standard Broadcast Viewer Roster And Fax it
to NTC Immediately. Or You Can Use NTC\'s Automated Viewer Reporting
System on the Homepage at Www.NTC. BLM.gov/satnet. I Was Informed That
That Site Was down Yesterday, and Everything Is Back up and Running and
Ready to Take Your Comments. Now, for Those Every You Who Signed up for
this Course, Please Complete the Post Test. You Should Receive this in
Your E‑mail. Please Also E‑mail this Test Back. It\'s Very Important to
Us. And Send That Again to ‑‑ No Later than Close of Business Monday May
22nd. That Gives You a Little Bit of Time to Do That. Hey, That\'s It.
We Really Appreciate Your Participation over the Last Two Days. Thanks
for Watching, and So Long From NTC.

Announcer: to Help Your Office Participate in Future Telecasts, See the
BLM Satellite Downlink Guide and Visit the NTC Homepage on the World
Wide Web. NTC\'s Internet Address Is Www.NTC. BLM.gov. Transcripts of
this Program and Other NTC Broadcasts Are Available on the Homepage. For
More Information on Upcoming Distance Learning Events, as Well as
Traditional Courses, Call the Training Center at 602‑906‑5500. Or Visit
the Homepage. This Broadcast Has Been a Production of the BLM National
Training Center.