Maybe slightly off-topic, but I feel it is worth airing to raise a key point.
While on my trip to Mull, I spoke to a number of locals which informed me that one of the most well-known nests for the sea eagles failed this year. The reason for the failure has been placed directly on the idiocy of a wildlife photographer. They shall remain anonymous at this point, but I am sure it will reach the news anyway.
The person in question was arrested and charged. Despite all the warnings, the signs, and the CCTV, this individual felt the laws did not apply and got so close that the adults deserted the nest shortly after incubation. The eagles lost one chick and now the other egg. These were the oldest surviving pair of Sea Eagles on Mull.
This is the price that our wildlife pays when photographers care more about the shot than the subject.
Elliott
Well raised point.
I am not surprised. The same thing is happening with the common birds too but a lot of it goes unnoticed. There are still "photographers" who do not realise that you need a Schedule 1 licence to do Kingfishers at the nest for example.The digital days of long lenses has supposed to have made it better ,but I am not so sure.
It doesn't do any of us any good.
JohnR
Other, prior, reports of this are on http://www.mullbirds.com/SEAEAGLES.html and www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=114226.
IMPORTANT
As there is a the a potential prosecution eluded to in the above links can I request that
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES should any name of the person potentially, or actually, arrested for this alledged action be posted on this forum.
The moderators will take a very dim view (i.e. seek the removal) of anybody who names any individual on this forum before the outcome of any potential court case.
I hope that is crystal...
If an individual is found guilty of such an act by a court of law, well that will probably be a matter of public record.
Please do not speculate on the identity. There is no point contacting me as there are conflicting views on the ID of the person involved. I cannot provide or clarify any more than I have above. The thread was to raise the awareness of how the way we work can directly and adversely effect the lives of the animals we love. The same goes whether it is a park squirrel or a masai mara lion. No image warrants this kind of behaviour.
Very sad news. I wrote an article about this sort of behavior by 'nature photographers' for a magazine. It's in Dutch so I won't be able to share it with you.
Here in Holland we've seen it with kingfisher, Tree Frogs and foxes.
Very very sad. If he's found guilty I hope he will get what he deserves. For deliberately disturbing animals over here you will get a fine of about 400 quid.
Edwin Kats
Posted by Matt Doggett on July 10, 2008 at 6:16 AM
That's really bad news and doesn't help our reputation.
On a similar note, given the new designations surrounding seahorses in England and Wales (Schedule I species) does anyone know if there are licences required to photograph them? Various people i know still do so in a responsible manner and are involved in their conservation but have no licences. The general attitude (regarding seahorses) seems to be that one or two pictures is unlikely to constitute disturbance. What are others views and/or does anyone know about licences required for photographing them? I'd like to know before I even think about pointing my camera that way.
Cheers
See, this PDF at the OPSI. The accompanying explanitory note is here
The full WCA-81 is availiable here at the JNCC here.
Again, with respect, ignorance is no excuse so I would suggest that everybody reads it, especially if you have a commercial interest in your photography, if only to understand what the schedule species are so you can aviod them.
Posted by Larry Corbett on September 9, 2008 at 9:11 AM
Tom
Maybe it would be a good idea to post the following link to the RPS Nature groups code of practice at the top of the UKNP forum ..period!? or develop the same sort of code of practice for the UKNP?
Discussion
9 repliesWhile on my trip to Mull, I spoke to a number of locals which informed me that one of the most well-known nests for the sea eagles failed this year. The reason for the failure has been placed directly on the idiocy of a wildlife photographer. They shall remain anonymous at this point, but I am sure it will reach the news anyway.
The person in question was arrested and charged. Despite all the warnings, the signs, and the CCTV, this individual felt the laws did not apply and got so close that the adults deserted the nest shortly after incubation. The eagles lost one chick and now the other egg. These were the oldest surviving pair of Sea Eagles on Mull.
This is the price that our wildlife pays when photographers care more about the shot than the subject.
Paul
Elliott
Well raised point.
I am not surprised. The same thing is happening with the common birds too but a lot of it goes unnoticed. There are still "photographers" who do not realise that you need a Schedule 1 licence to do Kingfishers at the nest for example.The digital days of long lenses has supposed to have made it better ,but I am not so sure.
It doesn't do any of us any good.
JohnR
Other, prior, reports of this are on http://www.mullbirds.com/SEAEAGLES.html and www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=114226.
IMPORTANT
As there is a the a potential prosecution eluded to in the above links can I request that
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES should any name of the person potentially, or actually, arrested for this alledged action be posted on this forum.
The moderators will take a very dim view (i.e. seek the removal) of anybody who names any individual on this forum before the outcome of any potential court case.
I hope that is crystal...
If an individual is found guilty of such an act by a court of law, well that will probably be a matter of public record.
Cheers
T
Please do not speculate on the identity. There is no point contacting me as there are conflicting views on the ID of the person involved. I cannot provide or clarify any more than I have above. The thread was to raise the awareness of how the way we work can directly and adversely effect the lives of the animals we love. The same goes whether it is a park squirrel or a masai mara lion. No image warrants this kind of behaviour.
Here in Holland we've seen it with kingfisher, Tree Frogs and foxes.
Very very sad. If he's found guilty I hope he will get what he deserves. For deliberately disturbing animals over here you will get a fine of about 400 quid.
Edwin Kats
On a similar note, given the new designations surrounding seahorses in England and Wales (Schedule I species) does anyone know if there are licences required to photograph them? Various people i know still do so in a responsible manner and are involved in their conservation but have no licences. The general attitude (regarding seahorses) seems to be that one or two pictures is unlikely to constitute disturbance. What are others views and/or does anyone know about licences required for photographing them? I'd like to know before I even think about pointing my camera that way.
Cheers
Matt
See, this PDF at the OPSI. The accompanying explanitory note is here
The full WCA-81 is availiable here at the JNCC here.
Again, with respect, ignorance is no excuse so I would suggest that everybody reads it, especially if you have a commercial interest in your photography, if only to understand what the schedule species are so you can aviod them.
Maybe it would be a good idea to post the following link to the RPS Nature groups code of practice at the top of the UKNP forum ..period!? or develop the same sort of code of practice for the UKNP?
http://rpsnaturegroup.com/page7.htm