Define a pet

markyboy.1967

markyboy.1967

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,171
Name
Mark Molloy
Edit My Images
Yes
Ok folks, after looking at the British Wildlife Photography awards and reading the rules which to me leave it open to manipulation. One entry is a captive animal and a set up image but the rules allow this to be entered so cant blame the person for entering. The entrant blogs about using a captive animal and how difficult it is to get this type of pic to the shortlist each year..

So my question is- how do you define a pet? A dog, cat, spiders, rats, birds etc which are kept for companionship and amusement? Is a captive owl a pet like a budgie, parrot etc?

Maybe rename BWPA to mean British Wildlife and Pet Awards as my good friend calls it.

So whats your thoughts?
 
I would say anything that is free / wild is not a pet, anthing that has a cage, bowl/ tank, fence or domesticated is a pet
 
Would an owl handled by a falconer be a pet then? Not according to BWPA?

Its says no pets but allows captive animals as longs as declared as such . I wouldnt say an owl bred in captivity as captive- more like a pet to me but i may be wrong. Whats your thoughts folks?
 
Which one are you actually talking about?

edit: found it. Not one of the ones shown on the BWPA gallery. Tawny Owl over Bluebells?
 
Last edited:
Just seen the shot your on about, It says on the BWPA Rules ''Domestic pets and farm animals are not eligible, nor is exotic wildlife photographed in British zoos, safari parks or similar locations.'' So the image shouldn't have been entered as it was taken at the BWC which is just like a Safari Park or similar location where the animal is captive and they say this is not aloud to be entered.
 
I agree with you Mark.

If the rules of the competition allow captive animals then that is the way it is, but IMO they are not 'wildlife'. To my mind the clue is in the first part of the word, a bird that it kept and trained to fly is not 'wild'.

Dave
 
But it's not an exotic species. I think it's cleary they're not concerned with wild vs non-wild, but native species vs non-native species.
 
If this is the case that shots from places like the BWC are being aloud to be entered into such competitions, does it make you wonder how many other photographers are doing the same thing?
 
The Wildlife Photographer of the Year had to disqualify their winner a few years ago for using a captive wolf, so it certainly happens even when the rules say otherwise!
 
The W said:
But it's not an exotic species. I think it's cleary they're not concerned with wild vs non-wild, but native species vs non-native species.
Click to expand...

I would say this is the case, if it's a native species that happens to be captive, that is fine, as long as you state it clearly in your entry so that can be taken into account when judging. What they are trying to avoid is umpteen photos of dogs, cats, sheep and Amur leopards. Not saying I agree with it, but that is how the rules read.
 
Yv said:
I would say this is the case, if it's a native species that happens to be captive, that is fine, as long as you state it clearly in your entry so that can be taken into account when judging. What they are trying to avoid is umpteen photos of dogs, cats, sheep and Amur leopards. Not saying I agree with it, but that is how the rules read.
Click to expand...
So by that a falconer can enter their bird? Or is that classed as a pet and not elegible?
 
If it's a bird that naturally occurs in the UK, such as a barn owl, I can't see any barrier. That said, as the competition grows in statue, the odds of doing well with a captive subject will I imagine continue to drop.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
So by that a falconer can enter their bird? Or is that classed as a pet and not elegible?
Click to expand...

I guess the answer is yes, as long as it's a bird you would expect to see here in the wild anyway. Many of them aren't natives as I understand it, either because they simply aren't or because they are hybrids that wouldn't naturally happen in the wild [though I guess @Cobra is best qualified to comment on that] so presumably would be DQ'd under that anyway. Why is a captive trained owl owned by the BWC any different to a captive trained peregrine owned by a falconer? It isn't as far as I can tell and therefore would be allowed. This is the problem and why they really should state, without ambiguity, no captives imo. However, their competition, their rules.
 
Joeturner11 said:
If this is the case that shots from places like the BWC are being aloud to be entered into such competitions, does it make you wonder how many other photographers are doing the same thing?
Click to expand...

You would be amazed at the amount of "wild" shots that come from there, i think anyone who has spent time doing textbook wildlife photography can spot a setup/workshop shot quite quickly.
These wildlife comps are nothing compared to some of the images taken by people i know on flickr but it is all based on what will sell calenders or the judges like on the day, the winner even said he doesn't do wildlife and i bet that greylag goose was begging for food from him so not the wildest of creatures :thinking:
 
Yv said:
However, their competition, their rules.
Click to expand...
Does anyone actually know who is behind the whole thing? It is just AA Publishing?
 
Neil B said:
You would be amazed at the amount of "wild" shots that come from there, i think anyone who has spent time doing textbook wildlife photography can spot a setup/workshop shot quite quickly.
These wildlife comps are nothing compared to some of the images taken by people i know on flickr but it is all based on what will sell calenders or the judges like on the day, the winner even said he doesn't do wildlife and i bet that greylag goose was begging for food from him so not the wildest of creatures :thinking:
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, if you have a look at the photo of this tawny (Click here) I mean without even knowing if its captive or not it just looks too good to be true, but at the end of the day it just comes down to money again just picking Images which makes the calendar sell best, not judged on field craft etc...
 
:agree:
Prime example Joe, money can get anybody shots like that and if you don't get it the first time they send the bird around for another go :ROFLMAO:
 
Joeturner11 said:
I know what you mean, if you have a look at the photo of this tawny (Click here) I mean without even knowing if its captive or not it just looks too good to be true, but at the end of the day it just comes down to money again just picking Images which makes the calendar sell best, not judged on field craft etc...
Click to expand...
Thats the shot to which i was referring to. Read they guys blog about the pic.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
Would an owl handled by a falconer be a pet then? Not according to BWPA?
Its says no pets but allows captive animals as longs as declared as such . I wouldnt say an owl bred in captivity as captive- more like a pet to me but i may be wrong. Whats your thoughts folks?
Click to expand...
Falconers are responsible for their captives, by law,
Are they pets?
Some most certainly are kept as pets / status symbols.
and never get to fly free.
(barn owls in parrot cages are a classic example)

Mine are working they fly free, and return.
(Hopefully :D )
If they don't catch their dinner I will feed them at the end of the day.
So if the definition of a pet is to provide exercise, shelter, food and water,
Then yes they are pets.
However they do not live in the house, nor get to curl up
in front of the fire on a cold winters night.
Just like a lot of working dogs too I guess.

Domesticated would have been a better definition,
Rather than pet. Although captive, I would suggest also covers it.


Yv said:
I guess the answer is yes, as long as it's a bird you would expect to see here in the wild anyway. Many of them aren't natives as I understand it, either because they simply aren't or because they are hybrids that wouldn't naturally happen in the wild [though I guess @Cobra is best qualified to comment on that]
Click to expand...
Indeed many display birds and working birds are hybrid - tribrid
and non native also.
Harris hawks (non native)
Pere x sakers (hybrid) Gyr x Sakers (non native hybrid) Gyr/pere x sakers (none native tribrid) are classics.

Very few people fly true Peregrines granted they are great on a grouse moor or in a display.
Sparrow hawks (Native) are used for hunting Magpies and the like.

Buzzards (Native)are kept in captivity, but they are so damned lazy, that many people give up and don't fly them.
Hobby's (mostly migratory) are rarely used, its embarrassing enough when a HH catches a worm without flying a species designed to catch
dragonflies etc :D

Merlins (native) are used to hunt larks, because of their habit of "ringing up"
But they too generally are hybridised with Peregrines (Per-lin)

Red kites (Native) tend to be only display birds as they are scavengers.

But I sort of digress, what I am saying is that most working (and sports) birds are are either hybrids or non-natives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yv
Yv said:
...and thus proving that all those hours in cars heading to some zoo or BWC with @Cobra was worth it, I did listen to what he told me about birds :D :LOL:
Click to expand...
And no need for me to "ask questions later" either :thumbs:
:D
 
markyboy.1967 said:
I think the word " domesticated" in the terms and conditions may prove to be the key word. Strange, strange competition- thats why i havent entered for a few years now.
Click to expand...
for that purpose. I would suggest that they fall into the domesticated category,
along with sheep cows etc.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
I think the word " domesticated" in the terms and conditions may prove to be the key word. Strange, strange competition- thats why i havent entered for a few years now.
Click to expand...

I think that is the thing Mark, those are the rules as they want them to be and it's your choice whether or not to enter. I am not a wildlife photographer and not likely to be for the foreseeable future either, but I would like to see a Wildlife Photography competition actually be about wildlife. The photo from the BWC is a lovely picture, but one I feel fairly certain many round here that don't specialise in wildlife but are competent photographers could have got in those circumstances. I have photos from BWC of animals that I am simply never going to see in the wild this side of retirement and I am very happy with them, but that sure as hell doesn't make me a wildlife photographer.
 
Yv come over to the dark side and join in the wildlife section- you will enjoy it- friendly bunch we are.

To me domesticated means an animal relying on humans to survive and living with or close to humans by that nature.so in effect the owl shouldnt be allowed to progress
 
Last edited:
markyboy.1967 said:
To me domesticated means an animal relying on humans to survive and living with or close to humans by that nature.so in effect the owl shouldnt
Click to expand...
You'll get no argument from me on that either :)
 
markyboy.1967 said:
Yv come over to the dark side and join in the wildlife section- you will enjoy it- friendly bunch we are.

To me domesticated means an animal relying on humans to survive and living with or close to humans by that nature.so in effect the owl shouldnt
Click to expand...

one day Mark, one day!! :D ....and you never know, I might not have to wait for retirement either, depending on how things pan out over the next year or so.
 
a. To train or adapt (an animal or plant) to live in a human environment and be of use to humans.
b. To introduce and accustom (an animal or plant) into another region; naturalize.
 
I was thinking of entering a few images this year but did not get around to it. Like you I do find it a little strange the British Wildlife Awards allow captive or set up images. It is in their rules but like you say a little bit of a grey area with the definition of captive and where they are taken. Perhaps it could be easily solved next year by having a separate section for captive British wildlife.

I've yet to see of the images but several I've seen so far seem set up or captive. Of course this is within the rules but it does detract from the truly wild taken images. It would be nice if they did display them marked as captive.
 
In the official book they are, with (captive) following at the end of the title. I imagine the same is done at the exhibition.
 
(double post)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top