ShipSpotting.com Forum
Shipspotters all over the world => Shipping News and information => Topic started by: Mallard on March 21, 2015, 05:54:43 AM
-
Three of us were told by a port official that we were not allowed to take any photos of ships in the docks as they could be useful to terrorists planning attacks on the port's installations. Leaving aside the obvious fact that Google has already done that for them, terrorists terrorise people, not inanimate objects, and the best places to do that are busy shopping centres, crowded markets, buses, trains, etc. One bang, lots of bodies! Plenty of publicity - just what they crave. They won't get much of that in a small cargo-only port in rural England, where bodies are few and far between. They'd need a truck bomb to make any impression on a place the size of even a small port and there appears to be no attempt being made to stop trucks from entering the port until they've been thoroughly searched by armed guards and sniffer dogs.
I'm sure I speak for all members in saying that none of us want to see any harm come to any part of the industry we love and enjoy or to any who work in it, but this kind of pointless prohibition hands a victory to the terrorists free and gratis. Have any other members experienced problems of this sort, either in Lynn or any other port, and if so, have you any advice on how we might proceed from here?
-
Have any other members experienced problems of this sort, either in Lynn or any other port, and if so, have you any advice on how we might proceed from here?
Yes: continue photographing as before, stand for your rights and oppose such police state nonsense!
Cheers,
Aleksi
-
Yet another jobsworth who knows it all. Bugger all! There is no law forbidding taking photographs in a public place in the UK. At worst, the port officials could accuse you of trespass, depending on where exactly you are taking the photos.
As an example; you can't get on to the docks at Southampton to take photos etc but you can photograph anything you like from outside the port boundary.
The next time this happens, tell the "port official" to quote the law that you are breaking. If he can't do that, tell him to call the police.
-
A few weeks back I was told by a security guard I couldn't photograph locomotives in a local railyard due to oil tanks in the background, even though I was standing on a public sidewalk. The claimed reason: national security. Utterly ridiculous, the whole area is on Google Street View, and if you've seen one oil storage tank anywhere in the world, you've seen them all.
I plan to bring the event to the attention of local media sources. We as photographers need to stand up for our rights so these entities don't get away with forcing these ridiculous, and often unlawful restrictions upon us.
Kind Regards,
Kyle
-
If you were in a public place then the officials have no right to stop you. However if you were on the Dock estate itself, even if you were on a permissive road, i.e. one which the port Authority owns but allows the public to use, the officials have every right to stop you, per International Ship security Code etc.
If King's Lynn is still owned by ABP, then they have a blanket ban on photography on their property, unless you have a permit. These are rarely given to enthusiasts, usually only bona fide press, and then under supervision.
It might be frustrating, but don't try and flout any rules, it will only make the situation worse, i.e. public places then get barriers off so you can't see anything.
ABP have had a ban longer before terrorism was an issue, but they were freer with passes then, and did give them to enthusiasts, but a pass was always needed.
-
There was a similar incident a few years back with a railway buff:- http://www.lynnnews.co.uk/news/local/this-may-look-boring-but-you-cannot-take-this-picture-1-2489174
This is what the MET has to say about it:- http://content.met.police.uk/Site/photographyadvice
Basically if captain clipboard comes along and has a go then ask him to quote which rules you are breaking, if they are unable to then advise them that you are more than happy to speak to the police about the matter and prove that you are not up to anything sinister.
Don't get into an argument with them just keep cool and stand up for your rights.
Personally if you have a DSLR around your neck taking photos then its hardly as if you can be labelled as a terrorist, how many people walk around with a mobile phone in their breast pocket making a video as they walk ?? How many of these people are stopped. Likewise dash cams are becoming more common in trucks, are these turned off on entry to dock estates ??
Google earth/street view has made it much easier for terrorists to plan attacks from the comfort of their caves, google street view has given them the option to walk the path with zero risk.
In my opinion removing photo permits has made it worse for port operators as they previously had a system of control for al persons visiting ports for the purpose of photography, now they have people photographing on the perimeters, through fences, from high vantage points etc etc and 90% of those people they have no idea of their identity.
-
I had regular annual photographic permits from ABP for Hull, Grimsby and Immingham and Goole - all came to an end in 2004 under the auspices of the ISPS code. Strangely to actually receive the passes we needed to give full details, in the latter years also passport/photo id was required so it wasn't as if we were untraceable. I know of a few enthusiasts who do still go onto the docks and take photos without permission, myself I don't consider the benefit to be worth the risk. Strangely though you can go stand on some lock sides in Holland and Belgium without any issues...
-
ISPS is about money/pensions and power and not about ship or port security !!!!
It was a god send for any governmental institution around the GLOBE !!!
-
Lucky me, most places here at Hamburg where I go shipspotting are public streets or walkways...
-
With ref to Darren's post, Railways and Ports are different beasts as far as photography are concerned. Railway Stations are classed as public places, and, as such, photography is permitted, provided the photographer is observing the by-laws in force at the location, e.g. not going beyond the "Do not pass" limits.
Following the ISPS code, ports are classed as private places, and access and photography are banned to the public, unless with the specific permission of the port operator.
Of course you can debate the rights and wrongs of this, but that is the case, however it is true that the rules are enforced more rigorously in some ports than others. Health and Safety rules also apply more now, which introduce their own restrictions.
However if you are taking photographs from a public place, even through a fence of a restricted area, only the police have a right to stop you, and then only if they have reasonable ground to suspect that you are involved in terrorist or criminal activity. They cannot do so just on a whim. If you are approached by a security guard in one of these area's, remind them of this. They must involve the police if they actually want to move or stop you, and the police get a bit annoyed if they are involved for no justifiable reason. Certainly in the UK airport security guards are trained in this, and might come and talk to you, but rarely involve the police. If they do it's usually because the person approached has got aggressive.
The same rules apply to airports.
It's all a bit of a nonsense of course. In some ports, like Goole, the port estate is crossed by several public roads from which photography is permitted and easy.
-
Here is an interesting thought - with the cost of "drones" (for those that don't know, basically small remote control flying things fixed with a camera) now coming down, do Port Authorities own the airspace ABOVE their dock estates? Providing they are operated and take off/land from a PUBLIC place off the dock estate there doesn't seem to be anything preventing their use. There is an article in the current "Railway Magazine" about their use and whilst there are general guidelines and the more obvious places not to go near, military establishments, airports etc, ports and railway yards seem exempt - well at least for now anyway.
As far as ABP Kings Lynn is concerned, there is a reason why they may be more sensitive than some ports, I won't discuss on a public forum but happy to discuss "off topic" via private mail.
-
Hi, there,
Many thanks to all of you who replied on this subject. Your support and information is greatly appreciated. Regarding the ISPS ruling, if it ever was reasonable and appropriate as a security measure, it has surely been overtaken by the march of technological progress, as pointed out by Darren. Banning photography in the vicinity of ports is utterly pointless as an aid to security. By way of an analogy, imagine a ship has been holed below the waterline. To prevent it sinking, the crew are running around like headless chickens in a farmyard shutting the portholes and cabin doors. I rest my case.
Just a postscript for Riverman2903. I've tried to reply to your message but the site won't let me. It's those silly letters they ask us to type. No matter how accurately I copy them, they tell I'm wrong. Thanks for the thought. Rgds, Mallard.
-
What you haven't made clear, Mallard, is whether you were stopped on the port estate itself, or outside the estate, but just in the vicinity. If you were on the actual estate, then the Port Officials were quite within their rights to stop you, regardless of the ISPS code. King's Lynn is an ABP port and their bans on photography pre-dates the ISPS as I stated above.
If you were just in the vicinity, then they had no right.
regardless of what you think of the ISPS code, it is force and ports are legally obliged to enforce it. Just because you think it's worthless, and that's a valid point of view, doesn't give you the right to ignore it, no more than you would ignore a speed limit because you didn't like it.
Ports and Airports are bound by the code until such time as it is recinded or amended. However some take a more pragmatic view than others. People will always try and photograph ships and planes, so the more enlightened operators provide facilities outside the designated port area. Felixstowe is a good example of a port which does that, while airports like Manchester, Amsterdam and Frankfurt also provide facilities. The more enlightened operators see enthusiasts as another pair of eyes, the less enlightened as an inconvenience. ABP and Heathrow Airport are good examples of the latter.
-
I recall a few years ago at Kings Lynn several twitchers having their collars felt as they watched/photographed a pair of peregrine falcons that had nested on top of the grain silo, they blatantly parked where they should not have done and then partly blocked dock gates etc so I can see why ABP were less than pleased.
Lynn docks is not the easiest place to get photos due to heaps of woodchips and stacks of timber etc, anything loading woodchips is virtually impossible unless its on the middle berth in Bentinck dock which can easily be photographed from the small swing bridge that passes over the canal (part of Crossbank Road) that links the 2 docks. Likewise anything on the silos can also be photographed from Crossbank Road.
As mentioned previously permits were issued for photography but following the implementation of ISPS and like many other ports they were withdrawn.
Whilst security is something that concerns us all in my view a certain slice of common sense needs to be applied, there are people who are crane enthusiasts, material handler enthusiasts, old Victorian engineering enthusiasts, twitchers, street photographers etc etc who all encounter some sort of aggro whilst enjoying their interests.
Pre ISPS there was little (if any) information published on the net about ship movements, the only way you would find out on the Humber is by spotting whats at anchor off Cleethorpes or asking the lock master at Immingham what was expected. Now all this information plus more is widely available on the net.
-
Good Morning All,
I have recently been alerted to this apparently controversial topic and find it quite surprising although understandable in todays politically correct world.
For some sixty years, a large part of which was through the Cold War I have been a fanatical aircraft enthusiast and as such have spent many hours around the periphery of Military Airfields taking pictures.
Although approached by Service Police and other security agents on many occasions, the encounters were all on a friendly chat basis and at no time were we prevented from pursuing our interest. Many also echoed the thoughts of one of your earlier contributors saying that spotters would be the first to notice anything untoward and we were another set of eyes.
How right they were and very short sighted of the Port Authorities to prevent this harmless hobby.
-
Never had any trouble with taking pictures of ships in the ports or seen any reason prohibiting me, although I have seen signs prohibiting photography in the security area. In general it would normally be okay elsewhere, especially when the signs read "the usage of cameras in this area is prohibited", which hints that other areas (such as of the ships themselves) is okay.
-
Sometime ago last year IIRC I was taking photographs of a recently berthed ship at Littlehampton Port, a rare ocurrence these days; others had done so and we were all congregating on a path adjacent to the Marina. I was the last one to get in position and talk a few pictures. I was then told, in a very polite manner by a person from the Marina office, that taking photographs here was not possible. Where is the sign to say so and why I enquired, the reply was sorry I do not make the rules, the boat owners do not like people taking pictures of their boats. My reply was well have you looked on the Marina web site? It contains any number of Marina boats on the internet then! It was after this I started putting my camera away!!
But there was something very odd. I did recall seeing a WSCC (West Sussx County Council)footpath sign somewhere. Looking on Google Earth I was standing on a WSCC footpath when I was taking my pictures!! So I do question the legality of what was done, but the politeness of the individual had to be respected.SO I am somewha careful when taking photographs down there, trouble is you do not always know when you are on private/public property.
-
Interesting, Aquizard.
Don't forget that a public footpath may well be on private property. In England, the public's "right of way" is only to pass along it, and not specifically to do anything else, so there is probably a grey area regarding what restrictions the property owner can enforce.