Do you think about your effect on the environment...

[SuperAP]

As nature / wildlife toggers, do we take the responsibility we have to the environment seriously? Is getting the image of an animal the primary concern, that overrules any concern of the damage that journey may do to the Biosphere?

We've recently had a White tailed sea eagle in the area, it's now been settled on the South Coast for a couple of months. I've seen a few postings on twitter and the like from toggers hundreds of miles away asking if it's still there as they are planning a visit.

In relation, I'm not that far, but I wouldn't make the journey exclusively to get shots of the bird, however rare to the area it may be. In my view the carbon footprint of that journey for a day trip is too great.

Thoughts?

 

[u8myufo]

Do you Chris? :shrug:

 

[SuperAP]

I'd like to think I do. It's certainly a consideration when I'm planning where to go, and I am one of those irritating sods who sticks at 55mph on the road

I suppose my one guilty pleasure in that respect is the BTCC, 5 or 6 times in the summer months. Although I square that by taking little interest in the global F1 circus and have stopped the 70 mile round trip to watch football 22 times a year... which I miss

But I'm not only talking about the impact of burning fossil fuels etc in getting to the location - it's also the disruption to wildlife that bothers me. Hundreds of people lining an otherwise empty field can't go unnoticed by the native animals and will alter their lives to avoid them.

 

[Adam_M]

Shooting wildlife with cameras has vastly replaced shooting wildlife with guns.

Says it all for me.

And also raises awareness as a bonus.

As for the fuel thing... frankly? it's not that significant, not these little odd car journeys. It beats just going for a drive without any real purpose.

 

[SuperAP]

Interesting thought, but how many wildlife togs would really be out there with a gun if not with a camera? And is raising awareness worth it if your subject then ups and leaves it's familiar hunting territory in the middle of winter due to the increased human presence? It could mean the difference between life and death, particularly with highly specialised predators.

Somewhat relevant to this topic - having just looked at some marvellous Short Eared Owl shots in the Birds forum, it'd be intriguing to hear the thoughts of those who travelled a fair distance to see them.

 

[Adam_M]

Interesting thought, but how many wildlife togs would really be out there with a gun if not with a camera? And is raising awareness worth it if your subject then ups and leaves it's familiar hunting territory in the middle of winter due to the increased human presence? It could mean the difference between life and death, particularly with highly specialised predators.

Somewhat relevant to this topic - having just looked at some marvellous Short Eared Owl shots in the Birds forum, it'd be intriguing to hear the thoughts of those who travelled a fair distance to see them.

A heck of a lot, I was speaking to an animal conservationist about it a while back. Shooting safaris have transformed into Photography safaris. It's the middle/upper classes, the doctors, lawyers and business men all with super telephoto lenses and big bucks who previously would come with elephant guns for their precious skin and horns as trophy's, now come with a 600mm and only take photographs as their trophy's, leaving the animals in peace and creating an industry that's more interested in keeping them safe rather than killing them off.

But I'm talking about places like Africa here, or the Antarctic. When I think wildlife, I just don't think about anything in this country.

Raising awareness... well, pictures of Pandas and Snow Leopards bring in tons of money for animal charities. I'm thinking a species as a whole, not say a migratory bird popping in for a while.

Having a few photographers around isn't going to make a great deal of difference to the bird, I'm sure almost all wildlife photographers are mindful about what they're doing.

 

[SuperAP]

A heck of a lot, I was speaking to an animal conservationist about it a while back. Shooting safaris have transformed into Photography safaris. It's the middle/upper classes, the doctors, lawyers and business men all with super telephoto lenses and big bucks who previously would come with elephant guns for their precious skin and horns as trophy's, now come with a 600mm and only take photographs as their trophy's, leaving the animals in peace and creating an industry that's more interested in keeping them safe rather than killing them off.

But I'm talking about places like Africa here, or the Antarctic. When I think wildlife, I just don't think about anything in this country.

Raising awareness... well, pictures of Pandas and Snow Leopards bring in tons of money for animal charities. I'm thinking a species as a whole, not say a migratory bird popping in for a while.

Having a few photographers around isn't going to make a great deal of difference to the bird, I'm sure almost all wildlife photographers are mindful about what they're doing.

I was thinking more in terms of the UK (which I guess I should have said). Most amateur wildlife photographers would claim to be concerned about the environment and the effects human activity has on it. Maybe the appearance of the WTSE in Sussex and Hampshire is a bad example - Better a single trip to see a very rare visitor than driving 300 miles to shoot a bird you could probably find nearer to home with a little effort.

Wealthy individuals going on Safari / guided tours is a whole new ball of wool - and I agree with you on this to a point. Despite being rather envious of anyone with the finance to pay Andy Rouse to show them where to point their 600mm "guns"; I agree it does aid conservation for the reasons you describe. Does that outweigh the environment impact of travelling there? Only time will tell.

But it won't be much use being able to protect Lions in Africa or Polar Bears in the Arctic if the local ecosystem changes and cannot sustain them any more...

 

[petersmart]

But it won't be much use being able to protect Lions in Africa or Polar Bears in the Arctic if the local ecosystem changes and cannot sustain them any more...

Regardless of what the Tree Huggers spout, local ecosystems change all the time and would do so even if we weren't here at all.

In dry areas forests burn and animals die, in flooded areas animals drown, in freezing temperatures many specias die, and of course one of the biggest changes which occurred 65 million years ago was the extinction of the dinosaurs and other smaller species in their hundreds of millions.

And that led, indirectly, to the rise of man.

But as nature has shown different species are coming along all the time, even now.

.

 

[SuperAP]

Regardless of what the Tree Huggers spout, local ecosystems change all the time and would do so even if we weren't here at all.

In dry areas forests burn and animals die, in flooded areas animals drown, in freezing temperatures many specias die, and of course one of the biggest changes which occurred 65 million years ago was the extinction of the dinosaurs and other smaller species in their hundreds of millions.

And that led, indirectly, to the rise of man.

But as nature has shown different species are coming along all the time, even now.

.

Now we're deviating to the more general theme of climate change - a phrase I hate, it's damaged goods like "global warming" - and isn't really what the thread is about.

But since we're there - If you think we don't have a drastic (and sometimes calamitous) effect on wildlife globally, read up about the introduction of Rats and subsequently the Mongoose to Hawaii (by humans). We significantly impact on the other species we share the planet with through our actions, far more than natural cycles would do on their own. 100 species are estimated to go extinct every day from logging alone.

Climate change is a natural process, but I believe we're helping it along the way.

 

[u8myufo]

I'd like to think I do. It's certainly a consideration when I'm planning where to go, and I am one of those irritating sods who sticks at 55mph on the road

I suppose my one guilty pleasure in that respect is the BTCC, 5 or 6 times in the summer months. Although I square that by taking little interest in the global F1 circus and have stopped the 70 mile round trip to watch football 22 times a year... which I miss

But I'm not only talking about the impact of burning fossil fuels etc in getting to the location - it's also the disruption to wildlife that bothers me. Hundreds of people lining an otherwise empty field can't go unnoticed by the native animals and will alter their lives to avoid them.

Well if I was honest I did check up on some of your threads and noticed your motorsport hobby Plus all the cars going around, that aint exactly doing favours But on a serious notehttp://www.suite101.com/content/climate-change-al-gore-is-facing-an-inconvenient-truth-a345463 Like it says we can all try and do our bit, but as far as I see it, wildlife was damaged years ago when hedgerows were ploughed up. Now it seems a reversal, farmers are planting hedgerows and setting fields aside to grow all the wild flowers we once saw as children.

 

[SuperAP]

I thought someone might pick up on that so I felt the need to mitigate in advance The part of me that loves tin top racing is trying to square it with the bit of me that is increasingly concerned by environmental issues. But I figure I need some sort of social interaction with my fellow homo sapiens to keep me sane

I must admit I've had a right bee in my bonnet about agriculture recently and the damage that it has done; but it seems there are a lot of farmers doing their bit - although you wonder whether it's just to get a subsidy under the stewardship scheme. I was brought up in London so I'm doing various courses and activities to try and increase my knowledge and understanding of rural matters - it's only really in the last year or two I've started to appreciate the world for what it is. Nothing worse than a townie poking their noses into things they don't understand, so i'm told

 

[u8myufo]

I thought someone might pick up on that so I felt the need to mitigate in advance The part of me that loves tin top racing is trying to square it with the bit of me that is increasingly concerned by environmental issues. But I figure I need some sort of social interaction with my fellow homo sapiens to keep me sane

I must admit I've had a right bee in my bonnet about agriculture recently and the damage that it has done; but it seems there are a lot of farmers doing their bit - although you wonder whether it's just to get a subsidy under the stewardship scheme. I was brought up in London so I'm doing various courses and activities to try and increase my knowledge and understanding of rural matters - it's only really in the last year or two I've started to appreciate the world for what it is. Nothing worse than a townie poking their noses into things they don't understand, so i'm told

Well that is good of you Chris imho, the thing is this climate change thing has been pushed down our throats for too long now and I doubt if any of those at the top have actually been out and looked at nature close up. Yes the amount of cars and pollution we create is not helping, nobody can deny that. But the climate change is really a natural thing which has been happening for millions of years, it comes and it goes. If you look close enough you can see fauna and flora and wildlife in some of the most bizzare areas. Wild orchids nestled in amongst the taller grasses right next to heavily used roads. Every living thing on this planet is part of the food chain, once upset such as ripping out the hedgerows you got a problem. We are surrounded by woodland where I live, and one of the neighbours was tellingme what birds have dissappeared over the years, and this was due to such a simple thing like woodland management. Yes there is still wildlife about in the area but it started to get so dense that it changed the habitat completely. Thinning out encourages smaller flowering plants to return which attract more insects, I dont think you really need me to explain Chris

 

[Kev M]

While your busy worrying about the environment of the wildlife you're photographing do you ever stop to consider the environmental damage caused by the mining for precious metals and other materials used in the construction of your digital cameras?:shrug:

 

[u8myufo]

While your busy worrying about the environment of the wildlife you're photographing do you ever stop to consider the environmental damage caused by the mining for precious metals and other materials used in the construction of your digital cameras?:shrug:

Obviously you do not Kev, as there is more metal in a Bronica than a Nikon

 

[Bikeman]

If the carbon footprint and the guilt of a car journey stops someone from going to do photography then maybe "still life" indoors is the way to go.