I've just spent a few days up in Derbyshire photographing dippers. At one site I found a nest with ease. It was quite exposed and the chicks were curiously and unusually visible. While I was there a well known wildlife cameraman stopped me and asked what I was doing. At first he was quite abrupt but, as things transpired, it was understandable.
He showed me images that he'd captured last week and compared them to my shots. It was quite obvious that somebody had trimmed (YES, TRIMMED!) the front of the nest to expose the chicks. We looked at the nest closely to see whether the overhang had simply fallen away, or whether the weight of the chicks had shifted the shape of the nest. Unfortunately it was still very obvious that the fringe had been cut as the opening was now square (not the most natural shape).
I hope this message does not get removed for being too controversial or political. I just wish to bring this destructive behaviour to everyone's attention. I must ask "When is enough?" Why would anyone act so irresponsibly and be so invasive just for the sake of a photo. No ringer would change the nest - it has to be for appearance sake.
Frankly I was disgusted and it makes my blood boil. Crossing the line in such a away is contemptible. I am sure I am not alone in feeling like this. I would just like to say that if any body here ever gets the inclination to 'improve things' in such a way... just count to 10 and ask yourself "Why am I doing this?" and listen to your conscience.
Having said all this, am I being overly sensitive? I don't think so.
I don't think you're being oversensitive at all, this sort of behaviour needs to be highlighted as much as possible on sites such as this one.
We all have a joint responsibility to take as great a care as possible and that means not taking pictures if its likely to bring undesirable attention to the site by other people, the growth in popularuty of wildlife photography has bought with it an added pressure on our wild creatures by those who only care about getting the shot rather than the subjects welfare.
Dipper are particularly likely to desert a nest if disturbed.
Glad to read I'm not alone The dippers were still feeding the chicks. I have to wonder though, how long it took for them to come back to the nest after the disturbance. The cameraman was furious and rightly so. I think if he'd caught the perpetrator, blood would have been spilt
I am sure the vast majority of photographers and wildlife watchers treat their subjects with dignity and respect. Why is it always that selfish few? I agree with Nigel in that there so many people out there now. Its clear that there is growing number that have not developed their field craft or have no inclination to do so. I fear one day, incidents such as this will be so common, all wildlife subjects will need a Schedule I license.
I fear one day, incidents such as this will be so common, all wildlife subjects will need a Schedule I license.
Unfortunately the people who did this have probably never heard of a Schedule 1 License and if they have would just ignore the legalities probably on the grounds that it's 'only' a bird and they have every right to do what they want, when they want to You aren't alone Elliott in feeling total contempt for the photographer that did this
100% support from this quarter too Elliott - there are so many organised opportunities and locations well set-up for controlled photography that's safe for the species concerned that you'd have thought that they would provide enough for the occasional enthusiast. Anyone who considers themselves as more than that really ought to know better, but as Kevin implies how do you make sure that people know about Schedule 1 licences?
I came across the same issue having spent some time working with a licenced handler for Great Crested newts recently and talking about it amongst friends (including some keen photographers) who were completely unaware of the issues involved with handling such creatures.
Unfortunately we live in an all too ignorant and ill-informed society when it comes to some of the things that we care about.
I would just like to add a little footnote to this for the dipper's sake as it is a popular subject at the mo. They are confiding birds and this can lead people (especially beginners through no fault of their own) into a false sense of security. When they perch in front of you chirping, its not to pose, it means you are too close and you should retreat. Both birds feed the young, but its the male that will tend to stay away if you are too close. Following on from Philip Kirkhams reminder, you should watch the dippers for several hours and count their feeding frequency rate. Its usually very high. Make a note of it and as you work your way towards a nest observe the feeding rate to see whether it drops. If it does drop off or they do not enter the nest at all, back off immediately. Remember, the subject is the most important factor... not your photo.
Thats just disgusting - totally with you on this one - I have spent aaggeeessss with my local Dippers making sure they are comfortable with me and having to pass up opportunities etc in order to preserve their safety & the integrity of the site - shame a lot of photographers do seem to be more worried about getting the picture...
I agree with you all, people shouldn't interfere with nature. I work on the principle that if you cant get the picture, tough, go somewhere else and try.
The last thing on my mind would be to actually cut away at a nest! Who would do this?
Which reminds me if anyone knows of any dippers in the glossop area email me i havent seen one and i'm puzzled as to why.
If people are going to 'alter' nest sites and go to these lengths to get a picture, doesn't it defeat the object of why we photograph 'natural' history, because a photo as a result of these actions doesn't seem natural to me.
I disagree in part about beginners not particularly knowing the signs of a distressed bird. I am a beginner in bird terms in comparison to the majority on here, and I once observed some Pied Flycatchers flying in and out of a nesting box. That was a while ago and I was even more niaive then, but I could still tell that their feeding and visiting frequency to the box was less and less the nearer I got. It seemed common sense to know that I was disturbing them and as I moved further and further back, the frequency increased..surprise surprise!
Being a beginner may not be an excuse, common sense has to come in to it. Surely the vast majority of photographers have emotions where wildlife is concerned? Perhaps I'm wrong , as in the case you mention.
Anyway, I didn't get any shots but felt a lot better for my actions
Graeme, I'm talking about absolute beginners. I'm not meaning to ruffle anyone's feathers here. Even professionals unintentionally overstep the mark. However, you must admit that the risk for beginners must be relatively higher? The desire to capture images can outstrip the need for learning and patience.
Not *quite* the same, but I've seen a professional photographer (who may or may not have been talked about on here) deliberately trample some fine fly agaric specimens after he had got his shots of them. I can only presume that this was to stop others getting shots of the 'perfect' fly agaric.
The pro/amateur distinction is irrelevant; it's the tosser/not tosser distinction that's the key in matters like this.
Discussion
20 repliesI've just spent a few days up in Derbyshire photographing dippers. At one site I found a nest with ease. It was quite exposed and the chicks were curiously and unusually visible. While I was there a well known wildlife cameraman stopped me and asked what I was doing. At first he was quite abrupt but, as things transpired, it was understandable.
He showed me images that he'd captured last week and compared them to my shots. It was quite obvious that somebody had trimmed (YES, TRIMMED!) the front of the nest to expose the chicks. We looked at the nest closely to see whether the overhang had simply fallen away, or whether the weight of the chicks had shifted the shape of the nest. Unfortunately it was still very obvious that the fringe had been cut as the opening was now square (not the most natural shape).
I hope this message does not get removed for being too controversial or political. I just wish to bring this destructive behaviour to everyone's attention. I must ask "When is enough?" Why would anyone act so irresponsibly and be so invasive just for the sake of a photo. No ringer would change the nest - it has to be for appearance sake.
Frankly I was disgusted and it makes my blood boil. Crossing the line in such a away is contemptible. I am sure I am not alone in feeling like this. I would just like to say that if any body here ever gets the inclination to 'improve things' in such a way... just count to 10 and ask yourself "Why am I doing this?" and listen to your conscience.
Having said all this, am I being overly sensitive? I don't think so.
All the best and happy photographing
It's totally abhorant behaviour and I for one don't give a care for who did the deed, they should be sumarily shot
All the best to you too
Andy
We all have a joint responsibility to take as great a care as possible and that means not taking pictures if its likely to bring undesirable attention to the site by other people, the growth in popularuty of wildlife photography has bought with it an added pressure on our wild creatures by those who only care about getting the shot rather than the subjects welfare.
Dipper are particularly likely to desert a nest if disturbed.
Thats a sad story you've told
"overly sensitive" ?.Its a subject that everyone should read and take in
ps.What was the views from the "well known" photographer ?.
I am sure the vast majority of photographers and wildlife watchers treat their subjects with dignity and respect. Why is it always that selfish few? I agree with Nigel in that there so many people out there now. Its clear that there is growing number that have not developed their field craft or have no inclination to do so. I fear one day, incidents such as this will be so common, all wildlife subjects will need a Schedule I license.
I came across the same issue having spent some time working with a licenced handler for Great Crested newts recently and talking about it amongst friends (including some keen photographers) who were completely unaware of the issues involved with handling such creatures.
Unfortunately we live in an all too ignorant and ill-informed society when it comes to some of the things that we care about.
Mark
T
I would just like to add a little footnote to this for the dipper's sake as it is a popular subject at the mo. They are confiding birds and this can lead people (especially beginners through no fault of their own) into a false sense of security. When they perch in front of you chirping, its not to pose, it means you are too close and you should retreat. Both birds feed the young, but its the male that will tend to stay away if you are too close. Following on from Philip Kirkhams reminder, you should watch the dippers for several hours and count their feeding frequency rate. Its usually very high. Make a note of it and as you work your way towards a nest observe the feeding rate to see whether it drops. If it does drop off or they do not enter the nest at all, back off immediately. Remember, the subject is the most important factor... not your photo.
T
Thats just disgusting - totally with you on this one - I have spent aaggeeessss with my local Dippers making sure they are comfortable with me and having to pass up opportunities etc in order to preserve their safety & the integrity of the site - shame a lot of photographers do seem to be more worried about getting the picture...
Mark
The last thing on my mind would be to actually cut away at a nest! Who would do this?
Which reminds me if anyone knows of any dippers in the glossop area email me i havent seen one and i'm puzzled as to why.
If people are going to 'alter' nest sites and go to these lengths to get a picture, doesn't it defeat the object of why we photograph 'natural' history, because a photo as a result of these actions doesn't seem natural to me.
Regards Chris
www.c-m-l.com
I disagree in part about beginners not particularly knowing the signs of a distressed bird. I am a beginner in bird terms in comparison to the majority on here, and I once observed some Pied Flycatchers flying in and out of a nesting box. That was a while ago and I was even more niaive then, but I could still tell that their feeding and visiting frequency to the box was less and less the nearer I got. It seemed common sense to know that I was disturbing them and as I moved further and further back, the frequency increased..surprise surprise!
Being a beginner may not be an excuse, common sense has to come in to it. Surely the vast majority of photographers have emotions where wildlife is concerned? Perhaps I'm wrong , as in the case you mention.
Anyway, I didn't get any shots
Rene de Heer
The pro/amateur distinction is irrelevant; it's the tosser/not tosser distinction that's the key in matters like this.
Superbly put