Bunnies, Chicklets & Children, Oh My!

A friend of mine sent me this message last night about the legalities of using animals in photos, here it is:

"Are there laws or anything about photographers using animals. I guess they would be considered farm animals. On my one rabbit site someone let a photographer use their rabbits and another photographer was going to turn the photograher into the USDA. I was just wondering if you had heard anything on this. Just curious..I know photographers use rabbits at Easter time."

My response was I wasn't aware of any specific laws but have heard of the PETA organization complaining of the use of rabbits and lambs at Easter and Reindeer at Christmas by photographers.

Here's the link to the blog she was referencing....I never knew any of this, really!?...a license needed to do this!. Just wondering if anyone has shot with non-domestic animals as props and has anyone gotten threatening letters about it.

april 1st is still a few days away...

joeseph wrote in post #15757634
april 1st is still a few days away...

Ya know I never thought of that possibility...but wouldn't at all be surprised if this were all true.

Well, it certainly reads like a joke.

The first thing that jumps out at me is improper terminology. A baby chicken is a "chick," not a "chicklet." A "Chicklet" is a piece of gum.

I think it falls into the same category as the old bras-for-cows movement (all those naked teats—disgusting!).

Can't speak to the licensing issues, but the sentiments expressed regarding health and safety of both clients and animals is on the money.

Bunnies and Chicks at Easter are akin to Black Cats at Halloween and should not be purchased as "knee-jerk" props for seasonal photography.

FWIW, rather real looking bunnies and chicks were being sold by several vendors at WPPI so obviously, the industry gets it.