The Trails Less Travelled

[WayneK]

Darcy Taking pics is cool, BUT, naming spots that are mostly 'local knowledge' and unknown to the general population is breaking a code of ethics, and uncool. Violent localism is also uncool, but, a different topic. Take your pics but lets just call it the "spot behind Buddy's house

[DarcyM]

Guys -

Yes, population is the root of a lot of problems ... but a discussion for another place.

I still don't agree in this unwritten "code of ethics" about surf spots having some special protection via anonymity. And just because your opinion is that it is unethical, doesn't make it so. Give me some solid arguments, show me some data or statistics or testimonials. When has a photo, with the spot named by name and no other locational information provided, given rise to harm to either the break or the people living there? Without ANY other influences? Meaning that the photographer didn't get drunk one night and blab away to all the local sailors on his amazing find up in the woods or out on the islands ... My point is that if you don't know or can't find out that "Lance's Rights" is on island X in the Mentawais, how does a photo called "Lance's Rights" cause problems?

I think it does boil down to censorship, and the censorship is enforced by paranoia and localism, which is another form of elitism. And elitism is not ethical, it's selfish. And if I call it "the place behind Buddy's house" I'm still naming the place, just not very accurately in the long run. What is it called when Buddy moves to Maui?

MOW: I don't agree that if I label a photo "Windansea" it's not the same as if I label a photo of a so-called secret spot. Frankly there are no secret spots in this town, although there are places that only break under the right combination of conditions, and so are secret only by their rarity. Like Doc, I could take a picture and label it, but by the time anyone sees it it's gone. The same may be true of many places (the one Bud alluded to in recent posts, for instance). However, the impact or at least the perceived impact or some kind of injustice against the local crew is the same whether it's a secret spot or it's Windansea. The difference with Windansea is that you can actually find it in the local Thomas' guide, among other sources. That doesn't mean that some of the more vicious locals want to have mass media exposure of their spot -- they have in the past threatened the local SURFSHOT guy with bodily harm for taking the daily photo there. Why? Because they have this notion that they "own" this place and by having surfed here all their lives that gives them the right to say who can and can not surf there. That's what this all boils down to. Yet no one ever truly "owns" a place, not by virtue of birth or money or heritage or right of war. We are all dust when the place continues on ... but don't get me going down that thread.

What I understand, or at least what appears to me to be the problem. is that I take a picture, I name the picture, I show the picture, and non-locals want to go there to surf. It makes no difference if the place is well known or not, the only difference might be in the preconceived notion someone might have of a place before actually seeing it or a picture of it. Like wave quality or crowd factor.

Believe me I can and have taken a picture of a perfect wave at Windansea with nobody in sight. Which might lead someone with less local knowledge of the place (and who only sees that one photo) to believe that they can run right down there and score ... and the same could be true of any hundreds of other spots. Assuming they can find it. Which, some idiots can't, even when you give them directions ...

The other problem I have with this censorship is something I was thinking about today, and that being the historical record that a photo becomes. Remember when the magazines labeled photos of Big Rock with other names like "moids" or "lobster lounge" or who knows what. These are records that might be important, someday in the future ... if nothing more than to say, "Remember that picture, when Hogan's broke like G-land in the summer of '09? Yeah, that was before the house on the bluff fell into the sea in 2013 and ruined the reef forever ..."

Then the other guy says "No man, that wasn't Hogans, that was Bolsa."
"Bolsa, no way!"
"Yes way dude, the stupid photographer changed the name so no one would know where it really was ..."
"Then how you know it was Bolsa man?
"My mate told me, he knew a guy who knew the other guy that was the uncle of the guy took the picture."
"Man, I coulda swore that was Hogans. Or maybe it was Little Point, man you sure it wasn't Little Point? Look, that rock looks just like that one there on the inside."
"No man, you could ask the photographer, but he like died two years ago...."

Or something like that.

But what I'm getting at is the historical record should be as accurate and consistent as we can make it, given that even our place names change and evolve over time and sometimes between generations. Because we don't want people confusing Hogans for G-Land for Bolsa which is really in Mexico. These details are important. I don't want to have to remember these things, because invariably records are lost, people move on, and we forget. And when we forget, we lose things ... like Killer Dana, like Harry's.

And finally, the other nagging thing that is the evil undercurrent to all of this, is that by enforcing this ethos of censorship, it paves the way for other kinds of censorship. If you accept that this is ok, it's only another small step to say, "no man, you can't take pictures here." Which becomes "man, I break your camera" which becomes "man, I break your face you come here again" which becomes, "man you don't live here you don't surf here." Which is the worst part of surfing, which is localism, which is bad.

[john -]

For the sake of conversation only Darcy

how do you feel about nationalism and borders and the such...I know I have gone micro to macro, but what drives localism in some respects may well be the seed that protects borders...do we want our borders protected...when does general change over from the particular...when does common sense regarding the areana (problem area) prevail...can people always be flexible enough to see the difference between a surf spot and politival entity?

as an Australian whose goverment is enacting a terrible dention system for asylum seekers at the moment...I say let em all in!....as a person mindful of environmetal issues I say lets monitor how many people hit this area...not that many from Afganisthan come with a long board

[ross]

i'am always on the lookout for clues
an example of how any exposure is exploited;

for instance i was interested in a spot featured in a certain surfmovie

first thing i look at are the features of the local people.(this will tell you which part of the world to look,if your clued in)and remember that people in one part of an archipilego can look different to others

water colour

landforms

gear surfers are using ie,brand names of boards,suntan,wetsuits,cars

street signs/car registration plates/boat names/airlines

one of the surfers in the movie writes lyrics in a song describing a town already known to me.

bang i've got the location

and i dont restrict myself to surfmedia to gain this info.i'm sure i'm not the only one who thinks like this, and has and will act on it.

be very careful when naming/photographing places.people are more cunning than you think .any exposure is bad exposure.

and as far as being a local is concerned.i dont care how crowded my local point gets,the set waves are shared evenly between 10 or so guys.
the way i look at it its even more fun getting tubed in front of 40 spectators waiting on the shoulder:lol:
which is why we need our secret spots

[Smokin Rock]

Darcy,
far be it from me to argue with a stubborn woman of irish descent... so i won't!
personally i loved your pics.
do you remember a short time ago there was a journalist who was ordered by a judge to reveal her source in some scandal. she was ordered to reveal or go to jail. she choose jail because if she revealed her source then her proffesional life as a journalist would be over. who would ever trust her again?
what does this have to do with you?
i think if people think you can't/won't keep a secret then maybe they would'nt want to show you some possibly juicy stuff. don't you owe it to us and yourself to be more....shall we say, creative in revealing information so the trust would be there and you could get the best shots/storys available? would'nt you agree that those secret, off the beaten path spots have more reader intrigue than say a story on the south side of huntington pier?
not so hard to eliminate landmarks and come up with funny and crass names for spots.
i appeal to your journalistic ethos.
aloha,
mike

[Shelfbreak]

Hi Darcy

I agree with all your views on localism -however I tend to agree with some of the others about naming spots, best perhaps to leave a few hurdles for those wanting to get off the beaten track.

Hey Ross, you should join the ranks of the detectives. Seriously though I don't think many have your drive, or the initiative and resources to follow up on these such clues. I'd suggest more spots are revealed when people get on the turps.

I recall your hilarious post about the American couple, the beer in plastic bottles and strides* around the ankles. Lord knows what secrets you blurted out during your campside rendition of the Memphis incident suffered by one of former prime ministers.

* trousers

[kidrock]

Just checked a website on surf in Cuba (thanks, Bud!) where the webmaster not only gave pictures and names of his local breaks, but also downloaded maps and gave explicit instructions on how to access the breaks!!! Really puts things in perspective, don't you think?

If I remember correctly, the theme behind "Endless Summer" was, paraphrased: "Look what else is out there in this big, wide world. Look at what is out there, maybe just a few miles down the road, from your own home break. Travel is the true adventure in surfing."

Granted, this was in the early to mid 60's, before the madness. It might even be said that Bruce Brown's film, in conjunction with "Gidget", "Beach Blanket Barfo", and surf music led to the huge poser crunch in the surfing world. In turn, certain classic breaks became infested with tourists and kooks, which led the locals to become more protective of their breaks.

Photos with names of the breaks didn't help. But, this is Y2K, amigos. Pictures of Windansea, Blacks and Newbreak aren't gonna ruin it anymore for these breaks---they're already zooed out. And, any surfer truly worth their Salt could take a look at pix of these breaks or Malibu, Hollywood Bowl or Jalama and know the wave WITHOUT a name attached to the picture. So, the cry of "ruining" these particular spots (and countless others) hold no water.

On the other hand, there are other more esoteric breaks which have been overrun in the very recent past (sorry, Seaside). The locals have every right to be ticked; and in turn, have every excuse to be protective. It should be noted at this point that I do not condone violence, unless it is to protect oneself or an innocent third party.

Here in Wa State, the locals really don't give much of a hoot if you take pix and name spots in areas like Ocean Shores or Westport. But, there are other "secret spots" where the local populace take extreme umbrance to outsiders and possible exposure.

My point being, respect the local customs. If they don't mind too much, cool. If they do, you might want to come and surf this break again without getting Beat Down.

Crowds are relative. What used to be a crowded day at Rincon or Big Rock 30 years ago probably doesn't even compare to today. It's just gonna get worse---fighting and bickering is useless.

[Man O' War]

As long as Darcy paddles out with Barry next time he goes out at that spot...

[ScottMac]

..

[Cripple Crusader]

By the sounds of it (as a complete outsider to this) this was kicked off by the Fuller's photos (which were cracking!! )...... now sitting on the other end of the world, sure i'd like to surf that wave, and I know all the info about it thanks to:

http://www.wannasurf.com/spot/North_Ame ... index.html

photo's AND directions!!!! i don't see what the problem with a couple of photos is....... it is the other info that goes with it that is important... swells, tides, winds..... local KNOWLEDGE.

That is the info that should be kept on a need to know basis!!!!

I've experienced this at my "local" break in SA... a bone-breaking left, smack in the middle of the city that was only surfed by about 10-15 guys. next thing.... it's all over the SA surf mag "Cold water Indo". a month or 2 of invasion.... and they all disappear.... mainly cause they didn't have the knowledge of when the place was on.

yeah, we all sit and dream about places, but 95% of surfers DON'T travel away from their local breaks to search for the best conditions on any given day.
If I know someone and what their attitude is like in the water I don't have a problem putting them into any break I know.

LOCALS LACK INITIATIVE TO EXPLORE

[fooj]

Darcy, You may be very right in your intellectual argument for photographing and revealing spots' names and how it relates to localism and censorship. BUT, you may argue until you are blue and many people will not EVER see through your eyes and mind. So, for your benefit, accept and respect a person's wishes about revealing a spot or perhaps you will not gain the privilege.

[fooj]

Oh yeah and Darcy nice photographs of the Big Sur area. Staying on the shore must be hard to do when its cranking like that.

[wino]

While we were down in Big Sur last week, and when Darcy was shooting
the photos of Barry, at least thee different cars with locals in them
stopped and approached.

There was nothing impolite or rude that was said, they just wanted to
know what her intentions were with the photos she was taking and to
please treat this special area with some respect.

How hard is that to understand?? This is not your backyard, you are a
visitor and being a visitor to any different area, it is just plain curtesey
to abide be the local rules and customs.

Frankly, Dary should realize that in reality she is very lucky. There ARE
folks down there who would have not given a second thought about
launching her camera 400 feet down the cliff.

Sure you can get a license plate #, but it's a good 20 minute drive to a
phone and another hour plus before Law Enforcement might even show
up. More than likely they would just file your complaint over the phone.
Even if they do respond just how seriously are they going to follow up
looking for some local guy who lives 100 miles from anywhere?? This
is Monterey county folks, and it is a HUGE area they have to cover.

There are cultures in this world where taking a picture of someone
is considered incredibly rude, or will bring bad luck. Would you still take
a picture if you were a guest in an area like that?? My .02 cents.

Thank you Scott. You are spot on. If you are a visitor to an area you play by the rules of that area. Period. If you are unable to play by the established rules expect to be dealt with in way that may involve violence and/or vandalism.
From my personal knowledge of that area, Darcy got off easy with a word of caution. Next year or next place she may not be so lucky. Show respect, receive respect.

[surfhorn]

Secret spots were over after the surfing explosion in the 1980's. And that was after it was over the first time in the 1960's.

I have a difficult time with any localism...pro or con. If you travel and surf a spot, be polite. Is that so difficult?

And locals who think they have a lock on their 'secret spot' are out of their minds; this is 2005. Everybody knows about just about every surf spot (except Third World countires, for lack of a better term).

The first time I went to Fullers was in the late 1950's on a backpacking overnight to go fishing. There were no surfers............because it wasn't a surf spot yet. I didn't know what surfing was yet so all I knew of waves is to keep a wary eye peeled while fishing. I grew up fishing, hunting and backpacking the Ventana just like my father had.

Same at Moss Landing..grew up there with my dad fishing and, when I did start surfing, I surfed there many times before I saw another surfer. And I was stoked the first time I saw another surfer in the water. Then surfers from Monterey County/Salinas crowned themselves 'locals' and broke windshields, flattened tires and were surly and nasty in the water. (my house is closer, nah-nah. No, really, my house IS closer.....so am I bigger local than you?).

How do you think some kneeboarders feel? Back in those days (pre shortboard and pre leash) KBers pioneered many of the hard-breaking reef breaks up and down the California coastline. How do you think we flet when standups paddled out for the first time?............we were stoked to share the waves with other surfers!

And what about our lovely State of California? It used to be a paradise that our families have enjoyed for decades (if not centuries!) but is now clogged with industrialzation.

Photos that name surf spots do not bother me in the least. I've seen my State of California overrun my the unwashed masses and the rich, clueless wanna-bes. We've lost what once was a beautiful, low key paradise.

But I haven't lost my inner paradise and if I choose to surf a break anywhere in the world, I wouldn't think twice about it. I try always to be courteous and I do take my turn.

But the law is the law, and if someone decides to mess with me, I'm usually better informed and decidely more committed than that person.
Remember, there is the law and then there is justice.

[DarcyM]

Rules of ethics in journalism are to be respected, like respect your sources and wishes. Perhaps in the future I won't be invited to any secret spots, so be it, but here's the rules I play by. If someone takes me somewhere and says, this is "secret spot X", you can take pictures but please don't tell someone how to get here, I totally respect that. If I take a picture and label it "secret spot X" I've respected both their wishes and my promise and protected my source.

However, if I label it "secret spot X which is located 5 mi east of the third exit off of Hwy 395 north of Seaport as shown to me by Mr. Z" ... I've just revealed my sources and violated a basic rule of journalism. Yes, if I protect my sources as protected by constitutional law, I'm willing to go to jail for that (and my father's newspaper was, back in the day, adamant about defending a reporter's sources and would back them in court 100%, a trend sadly declining in today's world). Most people aren't going to be able to suss out as Ross does where a spot is from just a picture of a wave. We're talking very few other details visible, assuming they don't already know where it is from other sources.

If I find the secret spot on my own, if I hike to the top of the mountain and photograph dorje's "Temple of the Sky" then go back and tell Michael Eisner that this would a great spot for the next Disneyland Buddha, I've probably violated some ethics. But there is usually more than one person to blame for exploitation, and if I can take a photo I probably won't be the first and certainly not the last.

As CC found out, Fuller's is no secret spot anymore!!! Thanks also Dan. Despite what the locals were saying to me, there were no less than a half dozen photographers that weekend, on the beach and in the water. So to who exactly does this no pictures rule apply?

If the rules of the area are unjust, they're still unjust. Yes I'm a visitor and I will respect the local knowledge of the spot for the surfers out in the water there same as I would anywhere. At no time have I surfed a spot and violated this basic tenet of courtesy. That's just plain common sense. I expect the same from visitors to my local spot, as should anyone.

There are places in the world where people are offended by having a photograph taken of themselves, in those areas you do respect the local customs. But this is the USA, and a "local custom" of don't take photos? puh-leeze ... and does it apply to everyone or just those not in the local community. Localism again. Scott also failed to mention that what the locals who approached me on the cluff were concerned with, what was spoken to me, was that these pictures don't appear in Surfer magazine. Which they didn't and they won't. And far from being civil, those that approached were somewhat aggressive and implied threats, and at least one yahoo yelled a threat from a passing car that was not pleasant. To hassle someone for taking a picture, you don't know that person, you don't know their intentions, you're just going to roust them because you think they're going to exploit your little secret, that's got nothing to do with courtesy or respect.

Yes, I will paddle out with Barry and look any a**hole in the eye who wants to say I can't and tell them to put it where the sun don't shine. They're just punks, and I've dealt with punks for many years and they don't scare me. If they want to throw down with me they're welcome to try. If they vandalize my car, that just proves they're not only punks but cowards. The law is the law, even out in the frontier of Monterey county, and I will pursue my rights under the law without fear -- prosecute if necessary, seize assests, teach them a lesson they won't soon forget. That is the way to bring civilization and respect to people who think they can be the biggest bully on the block and get their way.

Fooj is right that I can probably argue until blue before some people will see my point of view.