There are two trains fo thought.
Exposure causes other photographers to come and ruin the environment. The flaws in this logic is that photographers don't necessarily ruin the environments they go to. If something becomes so famous that a lot of people go there, turn it into a park, manage it with good trails and clearly defined off limit areas. The problem is not with photographers per se, it's with poor management for parks systems in managing their natural resources.
The second is, if people don't know about places, they won't fight to save them. From that perspective the more photographs the better. The more people know about a place the easier it is to get their names on a petition.
To me this is not a photographic issue. I have many times gone to government consultations and made presentations or submitted suggestions or objections. The way you save places is to champion parks creation and public awareness. Keeping photographers away is the last thing you want to do. When CPAWs (the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society) wanted to high light their campaign to save caribou, they took some very famous Canadians to the Slate Island, the second most southern caribou habitat in Canada, and shot video of the experience. As a result I went with my friends creating this page,
the Slate Islands
And my continued involvement in saving caribou habitat in other areas.
The Ogoki Forest
So from my perspective, landscape photographers don't per se help or damage the environment, but they can help preserve it. Mind you if your one of those socially conscienceless people who can go to beautiful place, take you beautiful pictures, litter the landscape, cut foliage, and start forest fires, then you your presence is negative thing.
If you're one of the ones that uses your images to educate and advocate, then photography is great tool.
If you know anything about the Slates it's that it costs a lot to get there. You need pretty good canoeing skills to get around and there is very limited accommodation, and it's a wilderness park, so there's never going to be a time when sleeping on the ground in a tent isn't going to be your best option. People who have been there will be the ones in the future who make sure it remains that way. The people who fight for this endangered species (Woodland Caribou) are those who have spent time with them, or those who appreciate the images. The average Joe doesn't know what a Woodland caribou is or what their problems are.
If you want to protect the environment participate with the Sierra Defence Fund or another such organization
https://www.arlis.org/docs/vol1/69415913/default_005.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecojustice_Canada https://www.earthroots.org https://www.cpaws.org
There are lots of people and organizations out there messing up the environment. They need to be counteracted. Sitting on your sofa isn't good enough. The idea that photographers refraining from going someplace is an expression of concern is almost laughable, to any who have been involved in the process of getting sensitive areas and critical habitat protected. It takes a heck of a lot more than that.
But overall, photography is neither here nor there in this debate. There are those who go out and experience nature and fight to preserve it. And those who go and take but don't give back. Same as people everywhere with just about everything.
Last edited by normhead; 05-09-2019 at 05:13 PM.