Very, very nice. What mountain range?

Thanks for the link Jerry. They state that six lots are privately owned by four individuals, three being non-TV people, but do not state if they are occupied full time, part time, or not at all.
If l recall correctly the home just above the swamp is owned by Mr.Nolan and l would think he is there at least part time. I think the answer to this depends on one's perception of uninhabited. Does that mean zero inhabitants or very few, full time or part time? I don't know the answer to that.

Jerry, Oak Island is not totally uninhabited. There are a few residences, very few.

Hotel California by Eagles (no, technically there is not a the in their name). Or most any of their other albums. IMO.

Great capture! Having grown up with cows I really like photos that include them.

Really, really nice. I especially like #3 (what mood!!) and #4 with the old bridge for contrast

Beautiful capture. But isn't that a female?

No, I don't. I don't have the skills, etc. for bird photography, much as I love birds. If it doesn't stay still I'm lost, one of the reason's I spend my available time on landscapes. But I sure admire you that do birds.

I believe what LFingar wrote is not just opinion but an established legal principal. I have read that this issue (what a person can phtograph when on public property) has gone all the way to the US Supreme Court and the decision was they can photgraph almost anything that can be seen from public property, even if it's on private property. There are a few exceptions such as military bases.

I love those little Nuthatchs. They are one of only two bird species that have taken food from my hand, the other being Mountan Chickadees. Thanks for posting it.

Now that the NPS is re-formulating its rules on this matter since it was reinstated by a court I don't think anyone knows exactly what the new rules will be. There is no guarantee they wil be the same as before the earlier court ruled against the NPS rules and threw them out. The earlier set of rules was harsh enough, hopefully the new ones will be less so.

When this law was in force before (before it was removed by court action) there were many reports of NPS personnel doing much more to restrict photography than described above, including arresting people who were not breaking the law. The "regardless of profit" quote does not reflect what was actually happening at times (not always) and photography for profit, or suspician of profit realistic or not, was definitely restricted at times. I haven't had time to read every word in the Park Service statement linked to above but it appears this applied to the time after the court threw out the privious restrictive rules and which have now been reinstated and what is written above by the NPS is no longer correct.

The Drivin and Vibin website, forum, blog (I'm not certain of it's proper designation) for RVers has a lengthy article on this this morning. This is a more far reaching law or rule, a reinstatement of a previous one that was thown out by court action by a photographer, but now reinstated, and I believe more serious than many of us think. Although supposedly this prohibits video photography for profit the Park Service has a history of enforcing it if they just think it's possible the photographer is doing it for profit, as judged by the quantity and size of their gear, for example. And in the article they state that at least in one location they limit gear to one tripod and a smallish backpack, maximum, and if you are over that you can be arrested. And shooting for You Tube may be prohibiited. I thought it was a basic of law enforcement that proof was required that a crime was committed, or at least good reason to suspect it, to arrest someone but in this case apparently a park ranger or other enforcement personnel can just suppose or guess that an indidual is filming for profit and arrest and charge a person with no proof.

I don't know if this link will work for Drivin and Vibin since it is by subscription (free). If you can get to us it's worth reading (a lot of RVers do photography for pleasure and often visit national and other parks, thus their interest. Thanks to Jerry for posting on this. I share his concerns.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?pli=1#inbox/FMfcgzGqQcmZRtJnZGTkpjZkLmJmbsnG

A great capturing of one of the most beautiful places on this planet, IMHO. I have been there 4 or 5 times and now being in advanced old age and having health problems, making one last trip to the Canadian Rockies is at the top of my bucket list, hopefully a leisurely RV trip. Thanks for posting these.

Joe, I look at all of your Hummingbird posts and you are truly the master of Hummingbird photography. Here at high altitude in Colorado ours have now apparently left. Sob!