Ethical Dilema's for Outdoor Photographers

[WingsofFury]

I saw this article posted on another board and thought I'd share it with you all. There are two parts to the piece, the first one asking if Photographing wild animals versus captive animals is a good idea, and the second asking whether Baiting wildlife is a good idea.

Personally, I know that I could never do either of them in order to obtain a photograph of a wild bird acting, well, naturally, but that's just me. I'm curious as to what everyone here thinks, and whether or not anyone here does or doesn't bait or shoot captive animals and the reasons why they choose to.

Part One -> Photographing wild animals versus captive animals (http://photoclub.canadiangeographic.ca/blogs/ask_cg/archive/2008/11/13/wildlife-photographers-ethics.aspx)

Part Two -> Baiting wildlife (http://photoclub.canadiangeographic.ca/blogs/ask_cg/archive/2008/12/19/wildlife-photographers-ethics-part-2.aspx)

Attila

[jgrussell]

I do think it's important to be truthful as to where a shot was taken: there's a difference between a zebra in a zoo and a zebra in the African bush. I don't see any reason NOT to photograph a captive animal: it's not going to be set free because you do or don't, and often the best photographic opportunities are in rehab centers where the price of admission helps pay for the rehab efforts. Baiting -- well, the definition used in the article is awfully broad. By that definition I should take down my backyard bird feeder.

[andrewhuxman]

Here is my answer to your question:
http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t47/ahuxman58/IMG_5522.jpg

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t47/ahuxman58/IMG_5572.jpg

Here is another shot of a stressed and harassed bird.
http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t47/ahuxman58/IMG_5733.jpg

[BradM]

I don't visit zoo's etc, too depressing for me.

Proper ethical behavior with wildlife means to not be intrusive in any manner, to not change an animals behavior or place any stress on it by your attempt to capture an image of it. I try to follow those tenets. Baiting is counter to the above so I would not do so.

[andrewhuxman]

Brad I owe you an apology, you were and are right about Birders are Wackos !!!!! after photographing this Snowy for about 4 weeks and reading about how us photographers were harassing the Owl ,,it was just crazy we were no way near harassing this Owl and if it did feel harassed I am sure it would have flown away because it has wings and can do that , but it stayed around for about 7 weeks. These Wacko birders would drive up yelling at us syaing "what are you guys doing out of your vehicles your stressing out the bird" the bird is about 30 to 40 feet away on a mound in a field looking at us. I said to the man "does it looked stressed?" So please accept my flippant responses to your accounts and experiences with birders I stand totally corrected.

[WingsofFury]

Ya, because this is what I wanted for this thread - arguments pitting one group against another.

Did any of you see how respectful the reasons given by those in the articles were, or are you guys just out to start arguments?

I'm looking for constructive dialogue about why people do or don't agree with the articles based on the information provided within them.

Can't we all just get along now?

[BradM]

Thanks but no apologies are required, the more you are around rarer or not often seen species the more of these "folks" you run into and then you too will have a series of stories to tell.

[BradM]

Ya, because this is what I wanted for this thread - arguments pitting one group against another.

Did any of you see how respectful the reasons given by those in the articles were, or are you guys just out to start arguments?

I'm looking for constructive dialogue about why people do or don't agree with the articles based on the information provided within them.

Can't we all just get along now?

What arguments? Andrew and I both agree birders are a strange breed.

As to the articles, didn't bother reading them. I have been doing wildlife photography for over 3 decades and have read, seen or heard just about every argument for and against one stance or another on this baiting issue.

And I'm willing to bet the issues I brought up in my original post are those spoken to in this article as it has been in the thousands of others that preceded it.

If you are truly on the fence on the ethical situation do some serious reading on the human influence on specific species that concern you or are interested in. Not even feeding or baiting but just the the prescence of humans in the area of a breeding colony of birds for example, some species noticable no disturbance, others abandoned young and parents dying of over exertion in threat responses.

If one is going to photograph birds and wildlife they need to know what or how they are influencing the species by their attempts to capture images, but too few bother to even know the species name let alone its habits and behavior. Too many people consider the wildlife just another zoo animal that they have every right to do with as they will, I call it the "Genesis Act" when I see it. They have the belief they have the right to dominion over the animal.

[artyman]

I'm sure birds and animals get far more stressed in their natural environments by the local wolf or eagle about to have it's lunch, than any number of photographers waving lenses at it!

[WingsofFury]

What arguments? Andrew and I both agree birders are a strange breed.

As to the articles, didn't bother reading them. I have been doing wildlife photography for over 3 decades and have read, seen or heard just about every argument for and against one stance or another on this baiting issue.

And I'm willing to bet the issues I brought up in my original post are those spoken to in this article as it has been in the thousands of others that preceded it.

If you are truly on the fence on the ethical situation do some serious reading on the human influence on specific species that concern you or are interested in. Not even feeding or baiting but just the the prescence of humans in the area of a breeding colony of birds for example, some species noticable no disturbance, others abandoned young and parents dying of over exertion in threat responses.

If one is going to photograph birds and wildlife they need to know what or how they are influencing the species by their attempts to capture images, but too few bother to even know the species name let alone its habits and behavior. Too many people consider the wildlife just another zoo animal that they have every right to do with as they will, I call it the "Genesis Act" when I see it. They have the belief they have the right to dominion over the animal.

I apologize - I believe that I misinterpreted Andrew's remarks as somewhat condesending, especially towards the end of his post. That, along with fights that I've seen break out on other sites about this issue, let me to believe that he was just being sarcastic. I apologize to you and he again.

FYI, there are several birders out there who believe just as strongly that photographers are a strange breed who don't fully understand the implications of their actions when they bait birds in order to bring them closer for photography purposes.

For me, I truly believe that it has a negative impact because teh birds are being led to believe that there is a food source present when there actually isn't one. We don't see these birds at "home" so to speak, so we don't know whether the habits they pick up down here are carried north with them when they leave.

I'm sure birds and animals get far more stressed in their natural environments by the local wolf or eagle about to have it's lunch, than any number of photographers waving lenses at it!

Once again, I think that depends on the species - especially when it comes to owls.

Once again, sorry for the misunderstanding.

Attila

[snowyowl13]

I think that baiting can be OK but must be done responsibly. I include using records to lure wildlife as baiting. It is certainly the same principle. i use calls to bring in owls but limit the number of times that I would call specific owls and am careful not to do it at all when there might be eggs beings hatched. I don't want to call an owl off of a nest on a cold night.
Next week I hope to try calling in coyotes using both bait and recordings. I see nothing wrong with doing this as long as I don't do it excessively.
By the way, i joined the CG forum. It looks like a good place to see some great pictures and read some good discussion.

[Pete]

Excuse me for not reading the linked articles (but from the comments here, I get the gist).

To my mind, there's two angles to this argument.

1) Birds/Animals being baited/fed leading them to become dependant on this as an easy food source - when removed, the bird/animal finds it hard to adjust back to "wild" life.

2) Bird/Animals becoming acustomed to the closeness of humans.

Bait: I don't see a big problem with this as long as the animal doesn't come to depend on the food source as it's only source of food. If this becomes the case and the animals become dependant, then they can (and most probably) will suffer as a consequence of it being removed. Also, baited food may not contain the neccessary balance of nutrients. Using feeders for birds in gardens is more ambiguous, but it's something that we (esp. in the UK) are encouraged to do.

Human contact: This is the tricky one. Yes, it's possible to condition wildlife to accept close human contact for photography/study purposes. This won't stress the animals out and when done properly, there's no harm done. But, animals can't identify the intent of the human content. What might be non-invasive one day might be a kid with an air-gun the next. It's probably better (in an ecology way) to help animals be wary of human contact.

[BradM]

I'm sure birds and animals get far more stressed in their natural environments by the local wolf or eagle about to have it's lunch, than any number of photographers waving lenses at it!

Certainly they undego stress from predators but from an animals pov humans are either prey or a predator, rarely are humans considered neutral repsonse species.

And it is this added stress that takes energy and time away from the animal that they need to reproduce and/or survive. For example in the Pacific Northwest there are large Elk herds that can be found resting in areas but if people stop and approach to shoot their images the animals must get up and travel away to stay a comfortable distance from the people.

At this time of year these animals feed is at its lowest point, many of these animals are at the point of having the mimimum fat and energy reserves. This "forced" movement by human interaction will result in many animals expending energy they could have used to find food. Many will starve to death, hundreds do every year.

And many of those that do die are a result of humans behavior because some idiots don't understand the needs and requirements of the species. This is just a single example of which there are thousands that can be found or pointed out. Foolish people can kill animals just as easily as a hunter with a gun or bow, but often a much more long and lingering death.

Adding stress to an animal is no small issue as you seem to think it is, which is the problem. Stress in a person life can result in significant health issues, why would it be any different in an animals life, certainly people are aware of stress reaction in behavior and health of their pets but apparently don't or won't make the same connection between wildlife. Where the wildlife doesn't have the benefit of a constant food source, secure site from predators, and conditions for raising their young like a pet does.

[gh patriot]

Common sense goes a long way and common sense isn't that common unfortunatly.

[andrewhuxman]

Common sense goes a long way and common sense isn't that common unfortunatly.


Nicely put..... and I agree with that.

[BradM]

Before a post was edited a comment was made that just walking through a park or forest can be damaging as well and maybe we should be closing parks.

That in fact occurs with some areas that have species at risk, around the country in Florida, here in Washington and elsewhere Snowy Plover nest on beaches in parks and areas commonly open to the public.

But because this species is severely impacted by human intrusion into their nesting areas these portions of the beaches are closed off to public access to help this species survive during their nesting and rearing season. There are a number of other examples as well.

Every animal is impacted by humans, some so little it makes no difference to their survival or the inverse; it actually improves their survival rate deer, raccoons, starlings, and others are examples of animals increasing their range and ability to breed since humans came into the picture.

Others are severely impacted whether by hunting, trapping or just humans moving into their previous range or modifying the habitat. And it is these animals that are becoming more rare and less often seen that people will pressure the most because of their scarcity.

But when it comes to photography people often make every attempt they can to get closer, to get a response from an animal, to interact with the animal, to capture images of the animals young. All of which can cause further stress or impact on the species. Much more impact than just walking/hiking through their habitat.


From my pov if one wants to be a photographer of wildlife they take these considerations into account and make every effort to not have the animal aware they are even there, to allow the animal to continue on it business of feeding, breeding and raising it's young while being as much as an invisible voyuer of the scenes as is possible.

[Pete]

There's a marked difference between continued activity encroaching on an animals habitat (particularly during breeding time) and short term sympathetic visitation.

Animals aren't likely to abandon a nesting site because someone sat a hundred meters away for a few hours and then left.

[BradM]

There's a marked difference between continued activity encroaching on an animals habitat (particularly during breeding time) and short term sympathetic visitation.

Animals aren't likely to abandon a nesting site because someone sat a hundred meters away for a few hours and then left.

Your right Pete, as long as is it isn't a constant stream of people sitting there and doing the same thing. And then there is always more that are willing to ignore the 100 meters and close into 20 to get the shot.

It is this reason when I may find some animal or nesting site that I will not share the information unless I am certain the person who learns it is not going to do anything I feel could be intrusive or that they in turn share with someone else who will do so.

Like GH mentioned common sense is so rare, those that have it should be held up as heros and examples of behavior.

[artyman]

I would have thought that most people using this forum are going to be sympathetic to wildlife and try to conceal their presence if at all possible as this presents the greatest opportunity to get shots.

[BradM]

I would have thought that most people using this forum are going to be sympathetic to wildlife and try to conceal their presence if at all possible as this presents the greatest opportunity to get shots.

There you go Art exhibiting common sense, most of those I am speaking of are those that are not wildlife photographers but rather those that own a camera and due to ignorance, lack of focal length or a sense of entitlement place pressure on the animals.

Think of those people that each year are injured, mauled, or even killed in places like Yellowstone. Like the idiot that sent his kid out to get in the picture with the bear, luckily the child lived. These are the people I am speaking of, and with 200,000 members on this site they are here; whether they recognize themselves or not is different story.

[skulpt]

My stance is this.

-If you are setting up a blind that damages part of the environment, walking and crushing plants, making a mark on the habitat, you're going too far.

-If you are taking shots near a nest and the birds seem harassed or nervous / spooked, you're going too far. I learned the hard way once, getting too close, and a bird (just a simple Robin) not coming back and leaving baby birds to die. :(

-PLEASE don't use flash in close, or try to not use it at all. That even puts humans on edge that aren't expecting it.

Basically, anything where you might be changing the actions or sense of being safe. The last thing you want to do is spook a bird from an area.

That said, some birds take to being photographed a lot better. Snowy owls for example don't mind it seems. Others don't as well. Some do. Just pay close attention to the behaviour of the bird, and go from there. Oh, and putting a fake mouse on the end of a fishing pole to get owl shots is pretty ____________ (fill in the blank). ;)

[Sean]

I think that no matter what some people are going to do what they are going to do. You or I may not like something, but we have absolutely no way of making them do what you or I want. We can yell at them, call them out on the internet or at your local club, but sometimes that makes the person who is against the activity look like the fool.

There is a fine line between OK and Not-OK. I agree that during breeding season and the likes, avoid or tread carefully around breeding birds or animals for that matter. Avoid doing things that you know are harmful, but it's your own code of ethics that you need to follow. If you are against baiting, don't bait. If you are against attracting their attention to get that shot, don't do it. However I am against treating another person like crap for doing something I don't like.

If someone came up to me, and asked me NOT to do something, and I felt it wasn't something that was harmful to the animal or the environment, then I'd have to watch my tongue. I am my own person, I expect people to be respectful of that just as I would be to them. I might not agree with what they are doing, but I am not going to treat them like crap to get my point across.

There are many "code of ethics" that are found online, but the one that I follow is one that I believe is important to me. Mine is similar, and I always have the interests of the bird or animal in mind at all times. People will be people, and do things that are stupid, I know I have, but unfortunately we are a fallible species and sometimes we make mistakes.

I think I have rambled enough for today. Thanks for reading.

Cheers,