The Ethics of Wildlife Shooting

Meryem Ersoz · April 18th, 2006, 07:02 AM

brendan, you have the most lovely way with words. chris hurd oughta name you dvinfo's poet laureate.

the shot of the kestrel was a bit off topic, too, i just tossed it up to short-circuit the growing foment. i've really enjoyed this conversation.

the kestrel shot has the privileges of a still photo. no interlacing, higher resolution. i shot it with a digital rebel and my big boomer sigma 300-500mm lens on the day the lens arrived in the mail, resting it on a beanbag on my car window. it was the first thing i ever shot with this lens. it arrived in the mail, and i was so excited, i threw it in the car and drove out to my friend's farm, and i could see some sort of bird of prey sitting in a tree. it was so far away, i couldn't tell what it was without the lens. it's another case in which an interesting subject showed up just when i was wishing for exactly such a subject. i drive by the farm periodically, hoping for more such drive-by/fly-by opportunities but haven't had any since. i love this lens. it's super sharp. it's difficult to manage at a whopping 12 pounds.

but it's great for maintaining long distances from your subject and still appearing right up close (back on topic!). even though the lens is enormous, you can be so far away that you don't spook the wildlife with it. i took this shot from about 70 yards while sitting in a truck.

Alan Craven · April 18th, 2006, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meryem Ersoz

brendan, you have the most lovely way with words. chris hurd oughta name you dvinfo's poet laureate.

They call it the blarney, Meryem - you get it by kissing a stone in the SW of Ireland.

I just christened my new mini Canon camera on an English kestrel, but seconds later the camera went completely dead - no elecroonics, no transport; I cannot even extract my tape with the kestrel footage. The camera is back with Canon. I just hope they return the tape with the camera.

Problem is, how can I ever trust this camera again?

Meryem Ersoz · April 18th, 2006, 01:09 PM

that's rotten luck. what model camera?

usually, when bad things happen, (and oh how they do!) lightening usually doesn't strike twice. whole new awful problems arise to replace them!

Alan Craven · April 18th, 2006, 01:48 PM

It is an MVX350i, you may know it as the Elura 90(?) - nothing like the quality of my XM2, but it is very small and light. I am hoping that it will enable me to get some footage in places where I simply cannot lug the proper outfit. I have often seen eagles, peregrines, etc when climbing in Scotland, and regretted not having a camera. The likelihood of damage to the expensive XM2 is just too great in these conditions.

I hope you are right about the lightning! At least the dealer is loaning me another camera for my trip to Scotland over the next three weeks.

J. Stephen McDonald · April 18th, 2006, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Craven

They call it the blarney, Meryem - you get it by kissing a stone in the SW of Ireland.

I just christened my new mini Canon camera on an English kestrel, but seconds later the camera went completely dead - no elecroonics, no transport; I cannot even extract my tape with the kestrel footage. The camera is back with Canon. I just hope they return the tape with the camera.

Problem is, how can I ever trust this camera again?

All of us Gaels are inflicted with the disorder and we canna help oursels but to run off at the mouth. Give us a keyboard and you get inundated with it!

I have a very good camcorder-----one of the best I've used. Except that I can't use it----unless it's for insignificant stuff. It works just great, most of the time, but at its whim, it takes French leave from its duties and shuts down tight. If I took it on any important shoot and it stopped dead, I'd have only myself to blame, as I know well how bad its work-ethic is. Try to get Canon to give you another new camera, so you'll have some peace of mind.

Brendan Marnell · April 20th, 2006, 04:52 AM

As the poet laureate (in-waiting & blushing madly) I must attend to my public image by disassociating myself from the practice (common among our tourists) of kissing inanimate objects. In fact I swear that I'm very fussy about what I kiss, especially in SW of Ireland. Who I'm prepared to kiss is becoming an increasingly rare question ... but nearby, also in SW of I, Limerick springs to mind (&my true literary form, plagiarism):

In Eden, one evening, young Adam
Was fondling the loins of his madam
And tickled to death
He surmised, on this earth
There were only 2 balls 'n he had 'em

I'm sorry I don't know whether he was wearing his lenses or sitting on a shooting stick at the time (go on say that again quickly, go on ..

John L Scott · April 20th, 2006, 06:05 AM

How interesting this post ended up! Great read. Reminds me of a family reunion I attended during the end of the fall of timber cutting in Oregon. The most interesting question was "What are you going to do now the trees have all been cut down".... I instantly understood the power of the media!!!!!!

Brendan Marnell · April 22nd, 2006, 05:43 PM

When compiling my last thread to include a limerick disproving my poetic prowess I forgot that this Forum has a range of readers some of whom might find my limerick inappropriate. If you think likewise, Chris perhaps you'd be so kind as to delete/edit my thread.

Sorry, to anyone offended.

Onward!

J. Stephen McDonald · April 22nd, 2006, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brendan Marnell

When compiling my last thread to include a limerick disproving my poetic prowess I forgot that this Forum has a range of readers some of whom might find my limerick inappropriate. If you think likewise, Chris perhaps you'd be so kind as to delete/edit my thread.

Sorry, to anyone offended.

Onward!

It has been my experience that if you're Irish, people expect that you might say almost anything and so you can say almost anything.

Brendan Marnell · April 23rd, 2006, 03:14 AM

Well if that's not unacceptable within company policy then I might as well test out mythology, even gossip, about ..

The cameraman from Pitlochery
Whose morals were nought but a mockery
Who, under his bed
Kept a lady instead
Of the homely & functional crockery

.. this can only lead to trouble, I know. However if asked to provide study notes to accompany this quaint language I shall have to decline. Tomorrow my granddaughter aged 1.5 will remind me that there are some things we can usefully work out for ourselves. I must ask her to be more specific ..

J. Stephen McDonald · April 23rd, 2006, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brendan Marnell

Well if that's not unacceptable within company policy then I might as well test out mythology, even gossip, about ..

The cameraman from Pitlochery
Whose morals were nought but a mockery
Who, under his bed
Kept a lady instead
Of the homely & functional crockery

.. this can only lead to trouble, I know. However if asked to provide study notes to accompany this quaint language I shall have to decline. Tomorrow my granddaughter aged 1.5 will remind me that there are some things we can usefully work out for ourselves. I must ask her to be more specific ..

Brendan, if your creative expressions become a bit too ripe for the general population here, post them in Gaelige and no one will protest.

Brendan Marnell · April 24th, 2006, 05:17 AM

Ripe. Good word Steve. First felt the meaning of it when I was 5 or 6, couldn't climb the fence to get to a pear tree and my big brother refused to pick any until they were ripe. Oh the pain of it ..

.. is this thread reincarnating itself as The Ethics of Wildfruit Picking .. I don't think so; granddaughter said nothing about it before she rolled her buggy up 'n down the lane and i rolled her in a buggy up 'n down the lane 'n she fell asleep.

But if we start thinking in Gaeilge it could splutter along for a while about The Ethics of Wild Irish Shooting or Wild Scots Evicting .. better not perhaps; 'twould only bring us back to Q.E 1 and her motto "Off with their heads". Now there's a title for a thread .. God, the times have changed alright

Meryem Ersoz · July 26th, 2006, 01:46 PM

i'm resurrecting this thread because i saw something quite interesting recently on cousteau's ocean adventures. it was this footage of cousteau the younger and a colleague hopping into the ocean with great white sharks and no cage. not only were they freely floating with the great whites, both divers actually hitchhiked on the great white dorsal fin. yes, they rode the great white sharks. it was pretty amazing footage but pretty disturbing, too, to see them inches away from the big scary mouth of a great white.

so, what is the difference between what they did and timothy treadwell. one difference that leaps to mind is that there are no issues with the great white acclimating to humans to the point that they are killed to protect the human space. that's for sure a consideration.

but i want to pose the question again, with the great white, rather than the bear as the backdrop. is the main difference that treadwell got munched and cousteau survived? or are there other unnamed ethical considerations to collapsing the distance between the shooter and the object?

Dale Guthormsen · July 26th, 2006, 10:08 PM

Meryem,

People do dangerous things everyday. The greatest problem is the media and giving any credence to what they portray. I have been involved in wildlife biology sense being part of a raptor survey back in 1970.
It bogels my mind that such a vast majority of people do not relaize it is not disneyland out there. The jackals do not talk to the lions!! my experience with most wildlife is that hunting them with lens or weapon makes the game more leary, not tamer. Does it effect their overal behavior? of course it does. Just like no scientist can study anything without an effect upon it.
the greatest effect on any species is loss of environment through encrochment of one form or another. animals in these altered environments act differently than those in pristine environments.

If you are in the pristine environment you will have less worry than in a marginal environment.

the coastal regions of British Columbia now have cougar problems where they are effecting people and other creatures in the mariginal environments.

you could hike into the back country of the northern rockies and never have a cougar come for you. any predator that becomes handicapped in the smallest manner will turn to easier and unnatural quarries, be it cats, dogs children or foolish photographers.

Where I grew up there was a fenced resavoir and and as youngsters we used to sneak in there and hunt cougars with our bows. It was a non firearm area and you could spot 3 to 7 cougars any day just laying out in the grass. They never bothered people as there was an abundance of deer. They were still amazingly difficult to get close to even though they saw people daily.

So when it comes to ethics of field ettiquitte I think that just common sense should prevail. Yes, I know sometimes common sense is not so common. Anyone stupid enough to get close to film a bear and its cubs gets what they deserve and there is one less idiot out there.

Back to the whiteshark thing. If you are in the wrong environment, or at the wrong place at the wrong time because you do not know the animals biology you will get only what you deserve.

Reminds me of an inuit kid at school in churchill. the polar bears were held up waiting for the ice pack. the principal of the school reminded the kids to stay on grounds and look out for each other. One of the kids, not schooled in the country strayed a couple hundred yards away. Kind of hard on the principal to pick up his had and reamining pieces!! Harder to tell the parents.

Ken Diewert · July 26th, 2006, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meryem Ersoz

i'm resurrecting this thread because i saw something quite interesting recently on cousteau's ocean adventures. it was this footage of cousteau the younger and a colleague hopping into the ocean with great white sharks and no cage. not only were they freely floating with the great whites, both divers actually hitchhiked on the great white dorsal fin. yes, they rode the great white sharks. it was pretty amazing footage but pretty disturbing, too, to see them inches away from the big scary mouth of a great white.

so, what is the difference between what they did and timothy treadwell. one difference that leaps to mind is that there are no issues with the great white acclimating to humans to the point that they are killed to protect the human space. that's for sure a consideration.

but i want to pose the question again, with the great white, rather than the bear as the backdrop. is the main difference that treadwell got munched and cousteau survived? or are there other unnamed ethical considerations to collapsing the distance between the shooter and the object?

Meryem,

I see your point but, one big difference is that the Cousteaus do a great many other things other than ride Great White dorsals. Treadwell tried to stake his claim exclusively by tempting fate with grizzlies.

I found Treadwells story to be disturbing, and I didn't find too many redeeming qualities in him... but maybe it's just me. As the story unfolded it seemed as if he had somewhat of a deathwish. And now he has been immortalized on film - albeit perhaps as more of a tragic figure than he had hoped.

April 20th, 2006, 04:52 AM	#111
Brendan Marnell Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 938	kissing 'n all that As the poet laureate (in-waiting & blushing madly) I must attend to my public image by disassociating myself from the practice (common among our tourists) of kissing inanimate objects. In fact I swear that I'm very fussy about what I kiss, especially in SW of Ireland. Who I'm prepared to kiss is becoming an increasingly rare question ... but nearby, also in SW of I, Limerick springs to mind (&my true literary form, plagiarism): In Eden, one evening, young Adam Was fondling the loins of his madam And tickled to death He surmised, on this earth There were only 2 balls 'n he had 'em I'm sorry I don't know whether he was wearing his lenses or sitting on a shooting stick at the time (go on say that again quickly, go on ..

April 20th, 2006, 06:05 AM	#112
John L Scott Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Fairbanks, Alaska Posts: 86	How interesting this post ended up! Great read. Reminds me of a family reunion I attended during the end of the fall of timber cutting in Oregon. The most interesting question was "What are you going to do now the trees have all been cut down".... I instantly understood the power of the media!!!!!! __________________ "Finding Gold In Tailings" www.dredgingworld.com

April 24th, 2006, 05:17 AM	#117
Brendan Marnell Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 938	4 letter words Ripe. Good word Steve. First felt the meaning of it when I was 5 or 6, couldn't climb the fence to get to a pear tree and my big brother refused to pick any until they were ripe. Oh the pain of it .. .. is this thread reincarnating itself as The Ethics of Wildfruit Picking .. I don't think so; granddaughter said nothing about it before she rolled her buggy up 'n down the lane and i rolled her in a buggy up 'n down the lane 'n she fell asleep. But if we start thinking in Gaeilge it could splutter along for a while about The Ethics of Wild Irish Shooting or Wild Scots Evicting .. better not perhaps; 'twould only bring us back to Q.E 1 and her motto "Off with their heads". Now there's a title for a thread .. God, the times have changed alright Last edited by Brendan Marnell; April 24th, 2006 at 01:19 PM.

July 26th, 2006, 10:08 PM	#119
Dale Guthormsen Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Saskatchewan Posts: 3,048	Meryem, People do dangerous things everyday. The greatest problem is the media and giving any credence to what they portray. I have been involved in wildlife biology sense being part of a raptor survey back in 1970. It bogels my mind that such a vast majority of people do not relaize it is not disneyland out there. The jackals do not talk to the lions!! my experience with most wildlife is that hunting them with lens or weapon makes the game more leary, not tamer. Does it effect their overal behavior? of course it does. Just like no scientist can study anything without an effect upon it. the greatest effect on any species is loss of environment through encrochment of one form or another. animals in these altered environments act differently than those in pristine environments. If you are in the pristine environment you will have less worry than in a marginal environment. the coastal regions of British Columbia now have cougar problems where they are effecting people and other creatures in the mariginal environments. you could hike into the back country of the northern rockies and never have a cougar come for you. any predator that becomes handicapped in the smallest manner will turn to easier and unnatural quarries, be it cats, dogs children or foolish photographers. Where I grew up there was a fenced resavoir and and as youngsters we used to sneak in there and hunt cougars with our bows. It was a non firearm area and you could spot 3 to 7 cougars any day just laying out in the grass. They never bothered people as there was an abundance of deer. They were still amazingly difficult to get close to even though they saw people daily. So when it comes to ethics of field ettiquitte I think that just common sense should prevail. Yes, I know sometimes common sense is not so common. Anyone stupid enough to get close to film a bear and its cubs gets what they deserve and there is one less idiot out there. Back to the whiteshark thing. If you are in the wrong environment, or at the wrong place at the wrong time because you do not know the animals biology you will get only what you deserve. Reminds me of an inuit kid at school in churchill. the polar bears were held up waiting for the ice pack. the principal of the school reminded the kids to stay on grounds and look out for each other. One of the kids, not schooled in the country strayed a couple hundred yards away. Kind of hard on the principal to pick up his had and reamining pieces!! Harder to tell the parents. __________________ DATS ALL FOLKS Dale W. Guthormsen

April 18th, 2006, 07:02 AM	#106
Meryem Ersoz Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 3,015	brendan, you have the most lovely way with words. chris hurd oughta name you dvinfo's poet laureate. the shot of the kestrel was a bit off topic, too, i just tossed it up to short-circuit the growing foment. i've really enjoyed this conversation. the kestrel shot has the privileges of a still photo. no interlacing, higher resolution. i shot it with a digital rebel and my big boomer sigma 300-500mm lens on the day the lens arrived in the mail, resting it on a beanbag on my car window. it was the first thing i ever shot with this lens. it arrived in the mail, and i was so excited, i threw it in the car and drove out to my friend's farm, and i could see some sort of bird of prey sitting in a tree. it was so far away, i couldn't tell what it was without the lens. it's another case in which an interesting subject showed up just when i was wishing for exactly such a subject. i drive by the farm periodically, hoping for more such drive-by/fly-by opportunities but haven't had any since. i love this lens. it's super sharp. it's difficult to manage at a whopping 12 pounds. but it's great for maintaining long distances from your subject and still appearing right up close (back on topic!). even though the lens is enormous, you can be so far away that you don't spook the wildlife with it. i took this shot from about 70 yards while sitting in a truck.

April 18th, 2006, 01:09 PM	#108
Meryem Ersoz Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 3,015	that's rotten luck. what model camera? usually, when bad things happen, (and oh how they do!) lightening usually doesn't strike twice. whole new awful problems arise to replace them!

April 18th, 2006, 01:48 PM	#109
Alan Craven Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: York, England Posts: 518	It is an MVX350i, you may know it as the Elura 90(?) - nothing like the quality of my XM2, but it is very small and light. I am hoping that it will enable me to get some footage in places where I simply cannot lug the proper outfit. I have often seen eagles, peregrines, etc when climbing in Scotland, and regretted not having a camera. The likelihood of damage to the expensive XM2 is just too great in these conditions. I hope you are right about the lightning! At least the dealer is loaning me another camera for my trip to Scotland over the next three weeks.

April 22nd, 2006, 05:43 PM	#113
Brendan Marnell Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 938	When compiling my last thread to include a limerick disproving my poetic prowess I forgot that this Forum has a range of readers some of whom might find my limerick inappropriate. If you think likewise, Chris perhaps you'd be so kind as to delete/edit my thread. Sorry, to anyone offended. Onward!

April 23rd, 2006, 03:14 AM	#115
Brendan Marnell Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 938	Well if that's not unacceptable within company policy then I might as well test out mythology, even gossip, about .. The cameraman from Pitlochery Whose morals were nought but a mockery Who, under his bed Kept a lady instead Of the homely & functional crockery .. this can only lead to trouble, I know. However if asked to provide study notes to accompany this quaint language I shall have to decline. Tomorrow my granddaughter aged 1.5 will remind me that there are some things we can usefully work out for ourselves. I must ask her to be more specific ..

July 26th, 2006, 01:46 PM	#118
Meryem Ersoz Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 3,015	i'm resurrecting this thread because i saw something quite interesting recently on cousteau's ocean adventures. it was this footage of cousteau the younger and a colleague hopping into the ocean with great white sharks and no cage. not only were they freely floating with the great whites, both divers actually hitchhiked on the great white dorsal fin. yes, they rode the great white sharks. it was pretty amazing footage but pretty disturbing, too, to see them inches away from the big scary mouth of a great white. so, what is the difference between what they did and timothy treadwell. one difference that leaps to mind is that there are no issues with the great white acclimating to humans to the point that they are killed to protect the human space. that's for sure a consideration. but i want to pose the question again, with the great white, rather than the bear as the backdrop. is the main difference that treadwell got munched and cousteau survived? or are there other unnamed ethical considerations to collapsing the distance between the shooter and the object?