Donna Nook - 21st/22nd November

Status
Not open for further replies.
Horrified by that picture posted by Lost. I know at least two organised trips with wildlife photography guides were at Donna Nook last weekend so I can only presume in this case that the guide didn't brief their clients properly or that advice was ignored. Neither is a very palatable position...

In recent years, there's a "macho" tendancy come in to some elements of nature photography, again I think spured on by media coverage of people like Steve Irwin. Lost also makes the point that people just copy others.

Lost - I am coleading a group trip to DN in 10 days time. May I have your permission to use your image in my briefing to illustrate unreasonable behaviour?

Thanks

Paul

Our guide instructed us to not touch the animals, which we did not and made sure did not happen.

As for a macho tendency...i spent most of my 8 hour day on my belly with a 100-400 miles away from the seals. Photos of this pup started in the same way, but once it started to approach and be inquiistive, i swapped to my wide angle and took the opportunity to get a different perspective. I never thought "Bah, its only a stupid seal, i will stamp right up to it and take whatever image i damn well like". It was a progression over about a 20 minute period!

Feel free to use the picture - use my face if you like. But dont you dare tell people that i (or my friends) are akin to a seal clubbers or vindictively mistreating that animal.
 
Yep, thats me in the Photo.

I have already said that i got close to the pup with a wide angle so i dont see why you are all so surprised. I am too close there though and i apologise (although i cant apologise to the pup)

However I maintain that I did nothing to harm that pup and i started off much farther away. Once it was clear that the pup was coming towards us and was quite inquisitive/perhaps hungry and not concerned about our proximity, i took my close up photos. I never actually pointed the flash in the pups eyes when taking a photo (instead using the sand as a fill light )and as i said before, this particular animal kept coming towards us and trying to crawl into our bags.

Im not quite sure how comments about Pedophilia are at all relevant to this conversation though?!

Firstly well done for having the balls to "own" up"
secondly whether or not the pup was distressed
thats up to you to decide, "we", your peers, mostly, weren't there and couldn't read the pups behaviour, that is a matter for you and your conscience
 
I am now quite concerned myself at what the possible repercussions of this will be with you peers and the information available to you, but I can promise, Hand on heart that i meant no harm to that creature and if i thought it wanted me to be out of its comfort zone then i would have left.

I have mentioned this privately to another member here and i didnt want to bring it up, but i feel i might have to as some kind of character reference. My Degree is in Marine Biology and i have done quite a bit conservation work in the past. Its not in me to be purposefully cruel to an animal.
 
I wasn’t going to post in reply to that shot, but feel I have to say something, it is my own personal opinion and not meant as any offence or judgment, I was at Donna Nook last weekend, what I can’t understand is the need to take a wide angle lens out with you, I took one camera and one lens out on the beach, that being a 100-400, I had considered taking a second body with the 70-200 but decided against it due to the extra hassle of carrying it, at no point would I have considered a wide angle, if I wanted to get a shot that close I would have taken it at the fenced area where the seals appeared to be happy around people and the wardens watch over you.

As I say this is not in any way meant as judgment just my thoughts so feel free to ignore me.
 
.....My Degree is in Marine Biology

You are obviously adequately qualified to tell the rest of us whether we can emulate your actions (as pictured) or whether we should keep a little more distance between ourselves and our subjects.

Maybe you can offset any animosity you may be expecting by putting down some guidelines for fellow togs who may be preparing to go this weekend.

Bob
 
I am now quite concerned myself at what the possible repercussions of this will be with you peers and the information available to you, but I can promise, Hand on heart that i meant no harm to that creature and if i thought it wanted me to be out of its comfort zone then i would have left.

I have mentioned this privately to another member here and i didnt want to bring it up, but i feel i might have to as some kind of character reference. My Degree is in Marine Biology and i have done quite a bit conservation work in the past. Its not in me to be purposefully cruel to an animal.

I don't think you needed to mention that. You, owing up to that shot is a huge show of how good of a character you really are. I am not sure I would have done the same thing, had I been in your shoes.

That said, a special THANK YOU to those who brought up this subject, and discussed it in with a very mature attitude; we're all never too old to learn something new. Also a BIG THANK YOU to the mods. who saw it fit to keep this thread running.

Most of all, THANK YOU to all those who've been there, took great shots and made this thread, and the many others on DN, possible.

I think a lot has been learned from this .. and that's the important thing .. stuffing blame and guilt isn't going to help the seals, the cute pups, or the great photographers who bring us such wonderful images.

May be it's time we move on and just draft a good list of what to do / not to do when at DN.
 
I dont agree with getting that close to the seals but if you were in a group and told that its ok to do so then whoever is running the group needs educating...

That said a degree in marine biology should gift you with some common sense. But from what people suggest, you are one of many and it would be wrong to point all fingers at you and blame you.

Its all education, as said multiple times throughout this thread. With the number of people on here and the resources available I am sure we could create an A5 flyer which has the facts about how to behave on the sandbanks. These can be given out by the wardens to everyone venturing out with or without a camera. Maybe even put the TP logo on the top ;)

Cheers
Euge
 
Or a less expensive laminated flyers that the wardens can show people as they walk out to the sand banks.

I have a couple printing contacts so can help with getting things printed 'gratis' or as close as possible.
 
wow, thats really disgusting. It reminds me almost of the seal clubbing from all those years back, dreadful

stew

Why?

After asking for a second opinion on the photo I am now convinced of that persons identity.

The mods have been informed.

Again, why?

I have followed this thread with interest as an impartial observer. I was not at nor have been to Donna Nook and I have never photographed seals so I cannot comment on what is or is not right but those two comments are pretty low in my opinion. Having read the story of how Kaben got so close to the seal I believe his intentions were innocent. A little bit different to seal clubbing I think! And why ever should the mods be informed? Forums are a place for (heated) discussion, sharing and learning. We shouldn't censure people just because they don't conform to a certain set of ideals.

Just my opinion. :)
 
You are obviously adequately qualified to tell the rest of us whether we can emulate your actions (as pictured) or whether we should keep a little more distance between ourselves and our subjects.

Maybe you can offset any animosity you may be expecting by putting down some guidelines for fellow togs who may be preparing to go this weekend.

Bob

I would, but i think it would come accross so horribly contradictory that it wouldn't be appropriate.

I know i am repeating myself, but this pup showed no signs of fear or stress especially in its advances, so i took advantage of the situation. If it had started yelping or trying to shuffle away i would have left it alone. I consider this particular pup an exception, i would not condone approaches to just any seal. I was in the vicinity of that pup for a good 15-20 minutes before I got that close. I would definitely say no to any approaches near the dunes, as that is a maternity area and the mothers are incredibly wary/nervous.
 
I wasn't there, so can't really comment on the amount of available light, but given that the picture shown is on a 600mm, I am surprised that a flash was required at all at what appears to be around 1m.
My other concern would be that the seal appears to be walking away from the position the tripod was in.
This would suggest that yes the seal probably did come to you to see what was going on. At that point, staying put and using a wide-angle should not be a problem? (I don't know how like birds seals are, but would a pup be abandoned because it smelt of human? If it has gone into a bag of its own accord, there is little that can be done?).
It does however look like the seal turned around from your position and was moving away.
It may not be the case, but the 'evidence' (who says the camera never lies) would seem to suggest that the seal is shying away from you.

There is nothing that can be done now, you have apologised to those that can listen.
Personally, I would be much less worried about the photograph if it had not had the flash.

Well done for owning up. Lesson learnt. Hopefully this example can be used in a constructive way to reduce the chance of others following the same route.

Edit:
My comment about the seal turning away is not in response to you saying it wasn't scared, I was still writing the reply whilst you posted that. I wasn't there, I can't say. From what I have seen of seals before, they often don't walk in a perfectly straight line, just a 'badly' timed shot in that respect.
 
As previously stated I was in the same group as Rob, we went with a guide/photographer who organisers wildlife shoots and he did not say anything was wrong ( he was the expert as far as we were concerned )

I have been on a number of shoots with Rob, quite a few of them wildlife and I know he would never want to cause harm to any of the animals and we are both mindful of our enviroment, as Rob has already said we went to a local seal sanctuary and made a donation because we wanted to give something back to them as they had been our subjects for two days.

I agree with the last couple of posts that the op who is contact with the wardens should try and use this and try to educate future visitors whether it be flyers or a notice board.
I still think the wardens should try and contact the RAF to get permission to ask for donations and have the authority to get people to leave the beach. The organised shoots should also be obliged to make a donation. I know it is a large beach and impossible to enforce 100% but I think something would be better than nothing.

The mods could also consider doing a sticky in the wildlife section of dos and don'ts with wildlife photography. I agree with WAIL thank you to the mods for letting the thread run.
 
When i posted that picture i did'nt want to start a witch hunt thats why i blacked out the face

I WANTED PEOPLE TO REALIZE WHAT WAS GOING ON AND WHY WE AS PHOTOGRAPHERS HAVE A DUTY TO WILDLIFE IF EVERYONE LEARNS FROM THAT PICTURE AND I MEAN EVERY ONE ON THIS FORUM AND WE TELL OTHER PEOPLE AND IT STOPS IT HAPPENING TO OTHER BIRDS AND MAMALS IN THE FUTURE THEN THIS WHOLE THREAD HAS BEEN WORTH WHILE.

Don't hang Kaben out to dry over this he had least owned up and is probably regretting how that photo looks i was walking back when i saw how close the pup was and i took the shots for use in talks and odd groups i take away. The pup could quite well have approached him it does happen as i said tunnel vision may well have crept in people get caught in a moment and things happen and people regret them later or even see them in a different light as i said he was not the only one and the tour guide has a lot to answer for probably more than Kaben. How many Saints have we got on this forum because im not one and remember he was'nt the only one i photographed

TO ME THE WELFARE OF THE SUBJECT COMES FIRST

Regards
Lost
 

I think it must be the position of the photographer that reminded. As soon as I saw the shot it took me back to those awful images.

I think its very hard for us to know what stresses a baby seal. The photograph shows the pup appearing as though he is turning away. I guess that might because a hard, direct light is being slashed straight at his eyes

stew
 
1_edited-3.jpg

Kaben, as you say you are a Qualified (have a degree) Marine Biologist, yet here you are with Camera and Flash within feet of a Pup... Now all others arounds you were either thinking "Look at that idiot" or "Oh so we can do that as well"

Which part of your qualification says this is OK behaviour. Nothing you say can defend this... Sorry... I suspect others were as guilty...
 
This thread was closed yesterday because posters were going 'round in circles without getting anywhere constructive!

Can we move on, please, and take this to the next level.

I think we've all got to the point of agreeing that ...

1) There were some pretty great shots taken at DN
2) Some shots were too close for comfort
3) DN has the RAF and wardens and seals
4) We, as photographers, can do a lot more to enlighten each other about how best to approach beasts in the wild .. thanks to this thread we now have the tools and means to do that
5) We have two, on this thread, who've studied wild-life in academia and know very well how to draw up a "teaching laminated A5 for all wardens to carry" :)
 
Whilst i will never be able to convince everyone that my intentions were not cruel, i am clearly shifting my weight/position in that shot, so please do not take it as gospel that i am flashing my strobe directly in the pups face. As previously said, i was using the sand as a bounce for fill.

Here is an example - you can clearly see that the flash is not directed at the seal.
4133793383_92a9827200.jpg


and just to show that i am not lying here is the seal approaching my bag. Be assured, the bag was moved before he touched it.

4133793391_bd2d7c75d5.jpg


As a group we meant no harm to any animals on the beach. We thought we were behaving responsibly. In hindsight, we could have been a bit more sensible and i can say no more than that i apologise for my actions and for offending anyone with my pictures. This seal was not harmed in any way and as said earlier in the thread, we are 99.999% sure that this seal was rescued by the sanctuary - he is now probably living in a pen near Mablethorpe being hand fed fish and having his belly scratched by a loving handler if the other rescued pups were anything to go by.
 
Ok we have seen examples of what may be called the wrong way to do it, i do not wish to pass opinion on that as it was not me in the situation at the time in question.
Here is an example of the distance we were shooting from(though we were closer in some instances approx 25ft) when we visited on the 15th November, the Tog in the pic is my dad who i am sure will gladly sign any model release's should anyone wish to use this pic in the future for reference. :)

 
Our guide instructed us to not touch the animals, which we did not and made sure did not happen.

As for a macho tendency...i spent most of my 8 hour day on my belly with a 100-400 miles away from the seals. Photos of this pup started in the same way, but once it started to approach and be inquiistive, i swapped to my wide angle and took the opportunity to get a different perspective. I never thought "Bah, its only a stupid seal, i will stamp right up to it and take whatever image i damn well like". It was a progression over about a 20 minute period!

Feel free to use the picture - use my face if you like. But dont you dare tell people that i (or my friends) are akin to a seal clubbers or vindictively mistreating that animal.

Kaben - Sorry, I have been out for the evening. I personally feel a guide should give more guidance that "don't touch the animals" That is the why I questioned whether it was bad advice or ignored advice. When I've previously taken groups to DN, I've explained about moving slowly, keeping your distance and keeping low. I personally think anyone taking a group has a duty of care to both their clients and the animals around them.

My concern about an inquisitive seal is actually whether it is hungry and is looking for food within range and so by being close the photographers stopped the mother being near.

The comment about macho tendancy was made in a much broader context than just that image and is a comment I have made earlier in the thread. I have seen people chasing seals along the beach at DN in a gung-ho fashion in the past and it is a change I have seen in the attitude of some people over the last few years.

Thank you - I do plan to use the picture, the owner of the copyright has given me permission but I don't want to show your face. It's not about a witch hunt to me but about showing people how I want to advise them not to behave. A lot of people have never encountered wild animals this close and there is a potential danger both ways from not being careful. As I said, I am keen to educate people to the best of my ability to ensure the impact from the visit is as low as possible. I have never said you were seal clubbing or mistreating the animal - I think that you put the animal at potential risk - but that is different to actively mistreating. I just want to try and stop other people making, what I see, as the same mistake. We don't know why the pup was abandoned but if he had to be rescued by a sanctuary then that is a shame.

All credit to you for stepping forward. That took guts and I think you should be congratulated for it.

As an aside, here's a picture I took on 30 November last year of what happens when things go wrong. I posted it then an a marine biology PhD student who had been monitoring the colony told me it was a pup who had died due to the mother abandoning it - alledgedly due to interference from photographers.



Please be assured, I am not on a witch hunt here but really want to work on helping educate people. I posted earlier, its not just seals but deer in the rut (although the people are the ones in danger), burrowing puffins, Schedule 1 protected species, etc. Someone suggested a thread on here. Perhaps in the tutorial section?

There are a number of cases where people come into contact with animals without fully understanding the impact they have on their subjects and I believe we, as wildlife photographers, have a responsibility to minimise any impact we have on our subjects - whatever they are.

Paul
 
Fair enough.

But being saved by the sanctuary was the best thing that could have happened to that pup - left to natures course it would be dead on Friday because of the 7.5m high tide. Its sad, but that is a fact.
 
Hello all,

WOW, when I first started comenting on TP about this topic I was angry and annoyed. I wanted everyone to know and I tried my best to make sure that that happened.

After the thread was running for a while it became clear that I had gone about it the wrong way. Peter done well to clear things up with the post that included his pictures and I think people started to realise what was being said was true or at least had substance.

Well done people for keeping watch on the thread and for commenting. Mods, well played and well judged for keeping the thread open.

I think what is really important, is that people pass this message on. Not just at Donna Nook.


Its time for bed!
 
This thread needs to be closed now. Rob has explained the back story as to how he got so close to the pup. He has demonstrated that the flash was not aimed at the pup. He has also shared details of how he is qualified to make a judgement call as to whether a marine animal is in distress and in particular this pup. What more do you want?

As I said, this needs to be closed now before the unseemly spectacle of the unqualified criticising the qualified turns this into a witch hunt. And as for the people who posted the "seal clubbing" and "paedophile" comments - you should be ashamed of yourselves.
 
Don't see any reason for this thread to be closed. It's still an open and free discussion. As for the "seal clubbing" comments, well they're not much different from the knee jerk reaction that started all this debate which have been apologised for so I think everyone deserves the same opportunity/right to reply.
 
It was my first time at Donna Nook out on the sandbanks Sunday morning and having read on here a various other threads about keeping a safe distance I was uterly sick to see so many photographers amongst the seals, yes some where at a reasonable distance some you could hardly belief were just to close and yes there were several pups that appreared abandoned this was hard to take, yes I got some shots and taken from a safe distance away but what I saw makes me want to just delete the lot and will I go again, no way far to distressing, to be honest this activity must be stopped

Just my thoughts from a very sad morning.

LesF
 
This thread needs to be closed now. <SNIP> What more do you want?.

I disagree, I think this has turned into an uncomfortable but reasonably balanced thread finally and strongly believe that the knowledge and passion contained in the thread should be guided towards making a difference in the future. I'm not sure how that should be done further than my earlier suggestions but I think it would be a shame for this thread to be closed or fade out only to have another thread like this next year.

As I said, this needs to be closed now before the unseemly spectacle of the unqualified criticising the qualified turns this into a witch hunt. And as for the people who posted the "seal clubbing" and "paedophile" comments - you should be ashamed of yourselves.

Agreed.


Now this is a serious question I have as someone who doesn't know a great deal about animals, I know it may look like I'm stoking the flames but I assure you I'm not, I'm just looking for an answer that will hopefully educate me and anyone else who reads it.

If you're on the beach and you've gotten close to a seal in a responsible manner what do you do if the seal comes towards you (more specifically pups)? If the seal is being inquisitive and is not scred then it is ok to stay where you are or is there a risk that your proximity will rub your scent off on the seal? In this instance does the seal who doesn't know any better need protecting from itself?


Please, no fanning the flames any more people, let some good come of this thread.







On a side note withregards to closing or liiting access, despite DN being an RAF range I suspect like some other bases there are public rights of way through the land in which case there is nothing the RAF can do to stop you accessing the ROW providing you don't stray from it (this was certainly the case ten years ago when I was doing gaurd duty on a base which had a public ROW (footpath) which crossed the airfield, maybe the powers that be in London have changed the law though).
 
I agree this thread has a lot left to give, I read and digested what was said yesterday and decided immediately not to post in case it was a knee jerk reaction. So after a long sleep I have some questions and and also some comments to make. This is I realise a subject I am not qualified to respond to but I still will. I'm like that :)

Sorry kaben I have a couple of questions for you firstly.

You say
Here is an example - you can clearly see that the flash is not directed at the seal.

Then when looking at the photo Lost put up you can clearly see the flash pointing at the seals face with your finger on the shutter. Please note this pup is looking away at the time of Lost taking her photo but is directly looking towards you on your chosen example photo.

Hats off for admitting you were in the offending photo and I do appreciate that you would not intentionally put the pup at any risk but in a previous post you write.

If i can take a picture of those pups before they inevitably die, then what is the problem?

This is all well and good but the problem is I feel that the pup still deserves full respect as you know it is going to die but it does not. I'm sure it would be distressed enough at this point just being separated from it's mother.

Anyone going on a TP meet carries the flag for these forums regardless of who is present and I thing big lessons have already been learned but would like to know that anyone in attendance this weekend would be suitably briefed either by a DN warden and if not possible at short notice maybe someone who is knowledgeable of DN or seals in general. As a last resort they should at least be made aware of the acceptable distances and behaviour around the seals at the car park or meeting place before going out on the sand. It is mainly common sense I will have to say.

Last thing, I enjoyed looking at the photos taken of the seals this week and especially of the pups and less than one week ago would have looked at a close up and probably posted a "cute" reply, if nothing else this thread has really opened my eyes.
 
Now this is a serious question I have as someone who doesn't know a great deal about animals, I know it may look like I'm stoking the flames but I assure you I'm not, I'm just looking for an answer that will hopefully educate me and anyone else who reads it.

What would I do? Personally? I'd back away. The seal may well not be inquisitive but hungry and seeking out mother and milk. Just because a week old seal approaches doesn't mean it is inquisitive in the way the word is sometimes used.

As an aside, I've seen an abandoned wildebeest calf literally walk up to 3 lions. Inquisitive may just mean hungry and unaware.
 
would like to know that anyone in attendance this weekend would be suitably briefed either by a DN warden and if not possible at short notice maybe someone who is knowledgeable of DN or seals in general. As a last resort they should at least be made aware of the acceptable distances and behaviour around the seals at the car park or meeting place before going out on the sand. It is mainly common sense I will have to say.

You cannot get briefed by a warden at DN as there isn't one. There are a network of volunteers who cover the site (largely the fenced area near the car park) in November and December. Therefore, we need to think about how people can be made aware. As I said earlier, I'm taking a group in about 10 days or so and will be doing that. However, if they choose to ignore the advice given, at the end of the day, out on the beach, there is nothing I can do. However, I do feel strongly that for most people, it is a lack of knowledge rather than a blatent disregard for the subject that causes problems - hence the whole education mantra.

Last thing, I enjoyed looking at the photos taken of the seals this week and especially of the pups and less than one week ago would have looked at a close up and probably posted a "cute" reply, if nothing else this thread has really opened my eyes.

Then for this alone, this thread has been useful...
 
Sorry kaben I have a couple of questions for you firstly.




Then when looking at the photo Lost put up you can clearly see the flash pointing at the seals face with your finger on the shutter. Please note this pup is looking away at the time of Lost taking her photo but is directly looking towards you on your chosen example photo.

Hats off for admitting you were in the offending photo and I do appreciate that you would not intentionally put the pup at any risk but in a previous post you write.

If you read that post fully you will see that i have said i am clearly shifting my position in the photo. The fact that my finger is over the shutter does not mean i am pressing it. I dont want to argue this any more, but as a photographer you should know well that a single still frame cannot show a situation as it is. Images have been used in many media publications where a frame out of a series has been used to to make a celebrity look like they are doing something they are not.

All i am going to say in the matter is i WAS NOT pointing at the seals face. I have given you the shot from almost the exact same moment to prove it if you look at the orientation of the pup in both images.

As to my previous comment, that can be cross referenced to where i said i was not stressing the seal, so i did not see any issue with taking the image.

I know in my own mind that i did nothing to harm that seal. Those who were not there or with me can make their own decisions on the matter.
 
i was not stressing the seal, so i did not see any issue with taking the image.

Sorry by been so close the damage was done, IMO you were not respecting the seals enviroment, you and the combination of flash been so close will have not done any favours for that seal or the mother. It was not only you but there were other photographers also plainly not respecting the seals enviroment after all you and the other were guests into there enviroment and it was plainly abused.

I will never go back there it was more distressing seeing the actions of so many photographers not just you ruining things for others that were trying to keep a safe distance.

LesF
 
Guys, we're starting to go around in circles again. Please use your energy in finding a positive outcome form this instead of the continued finger pointing.
 
Kev's right. I don't think there's any more to be gained by going over Kaben's photo and how he took it, all over again. Kaben has explained himself in the thread and it's now time to move on.

What would be fantastic is if we could direct the conversation into the arena of education so that we as TP members do all we can to help people realise the importance of correct interaction with these beautiful animals.
 
I have never been to Donna Nook.
If there is a car-park, is there an option to get a small bill-board made up with Do's and Don'ts on it?
I don't know how much of a cost this would be, and how much it would need in donations.

The trouble is, people need to be there to give out flyers, and bill-boards are often ignored by people who think they might know better.
 
Perhaps some of the more experianced wildlife photographers could post some general rules for photographing wildlife without been too bad on the animals. They could do in the tutorial section for us all to read and learn from.
 
Here is the Royal Photographic Societies code of practise for Nature

The Nature Photographers' Code of Practice
Produced by The Nature Group of The Royal Photographic Society.
Revised in 1997 and 2007 in consultation with the RSPB and the three Statutory Nature Conservation Councils.


There is one hard and fast rule, whose spirit must be observed at all times -

"The welfare of the subject is more important than the photograph.”


Introduction
Photography should not be undertaken if it puts the subject at risk. Risk to the subject, in this context, means risk of disturbance, physical damage, causing anxiety, consequential predation, and lessened reproductive success.

Photography may be seen as a criminal offence with relation to some species, since disturbance will be occasioned.

Many species are afforded special legal protection. The Law as it affects nature photography must be observed. For Great Britain the main legislation is listed at the end of this leaflet. In other countries one should find out in advance any restrictions that apply.

Apparent lax or absence of local legislation should not lead any photographer to relax his/her own high standard.

General
The photographer should be familiar with the natural history of the subject; the more complex the life-form and the rarer the species, the greater his/ her knowledge must be. He/ she should also be sufficiently familiar with other natural history subjects to be able to avoid damaging their interests accidentally. Photography of uncommon creatures and plants by people who know nothing of the hazards to species and habitat is to be deplored.

With reference to Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs): anyone who intentionally or recklessly destroys or damages any of the flora, fauna, geological or physio-graphical features by reason of which a site is of special interest, or intentionally or recklessly disturbs any of those fauna, is guilty of an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine.

It is important for the good name of nature photography that its practitioners observe normal social courtesies. Permission should be obtained before working on private land and other naturalists should not be incommoded. Work at sites and colonies which are subjects of special study should be coordinated with the people concerned.

Photographs of dead, stuffed, homebred, captive, cultivated, or otherwise controlled specimens may be of genuine value but should never be passed off as wild and free. Users of such photographs (irrespective of the purpose for which it is thought they will be used) should always be informed, regardless of how little they may seem to care.

Birds at the nest
The terms of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 19811 must be complied with at all times. It is an offence to recklessly or intentionally disturb a Schedule 1 species while it is building a nest, or is in, on or near a nest containing eggs or young; or to disturb the dependant young of such a species. In Scotland it is an offence to recklessly or intentionally disturb or harrass any Schedule 1A bird (ie White-tailed Eagle) or any Schedule 1 bird which leks (ie Capercaillie).

A licence is necessary to photograph Schedule 1 birds in certain circumstances. Licences can be obtained from the appropriate Statutory Nature Conservation body - see addresses at the end.

Photography of birds at the nest should only be undertaken by those with a good knowledge of bird breeding behaviour. There are many competent photographers (and bird watchers) who lack this qualification.

Scarce species should only be photographed in an area where they may be relatively frequent; it is therefore preferable to photograph British rarities overseas where they may be commoner. Photographers working abroad should exercise the same care as they would at home.

A hide should always be used if there is a reasonable doubt that birds would continue normal breeding behaviour otherwise. No part of the occupant should be visible from the outside of the hide.

Hides should not be erected where the attention of the public or a predator is likely to be attracted. If there is any such risk, an assistant should be in the vicinity to keep potential intruders away. No hide should be left unattended in daylight in a place with common public access.

Visits to a site should be kept to a minimum to avoid damage to vegetation and the creation of new tracks or pathways. The site should be restored to naturalness between sessions.

Reported nest failures due to nest photography are few, but a high proportion of those that occur are due to undue haste. The maximum possible time should elapse between stages of hide movement or erection, introduction of lens or flash equipment, gardening and occupation. Many species need preparation at least a week in advance; this should be seen as the norm. Each stage should be fully accepted by the bird (or birds, where feeding or incubation is shared) before the next stage is initiated. If a stage is refused by the birds (which should be evident from their behaviour to a competent bird photographer) the procedure should be reversed at least one stage; if refusal is repeated photography should be abandoned.

The period of disturbance caused by each stage should be kept to a minimum. It is undesirable to initiate a stage in late evening, when the birds’ activities are becoming less frequent.

Remote-control work where acceptance cannot be checked is rarely satisfactory. Resetting of a shutter or manually advancing film is even less likely to be acceptable because of the frequency of disturbance.

While the best photographs are often obtained about the time of hatching this is not the time to start erecting a hide - nor when eggs are fresh. It is better to wait until the reactions of the parent birds to the situation are firmly established.

The birds’ first visits to the nest after the hide is occupied are best used for checking routes and behaviour rather than for exposures. The quieter the shutter, the less the chance of birds objecting to it. The longer the focal length of the lens used, the more distant the hide can be and the less risk of the birds not accepting it.

Nesting birds photographed from a hide can be put under pressure if too many photographers are waiting for ‘their turn’ in the hide. Each change of photographer causes fresh disturbance and should be avoided. Ideally two photographers working together should be the norm - two to enter the hide and one to leave, although more may be required for some species. Disturbance should always be kept to an absolute minimum and should never be caused during bad weather (rain or exceptionally hot sun).

The trapping of breeding birds for studio-type photography is totally unacceptable in any circumstances and an offence3 under the WCA.

It is an offence to remove nestlings or eggs from the nest for photo-graphy even on a temporary basis; when photographed in situ care should be taken not to cause an ‘explosion’ of young from the nest. It is never permissible to artificially restrict the free movement of the young.

The use of playback tape or stuffed predators (to stimulate territorial or alarm reactions) should not be undertaken near the nest in the breeding season. Additionally the use of bait or song tapes to attract birds to the camera, even though this is away from the nest, should not be under-taken in an occupied breeding territory. Use of such methods may be considered illegal with respect to Schedule 1 species.

Mammals and Birds away from the nest
Predators should not be baited from a hide in an area where hides may later be used for photography of birds at the nest.

Wait and see photography should not be undertaken in an area where a hide may show irresponsible shooters and trappers that targets exist; this is particularly important overseas.

The capture of even non-breeding birds for photography under controlled conditions is not an acceptable or legal practice. Incidental photography of birds taken under licence for some valid scientific purpose is acceptable provided it causes minimal delay to the bird’s release. If any extra delay is involved it would need to be covered by the terms of the licence.

Taking small mammals2 for photographic purposes is not recommended. In exceptional cases where captivity is necessary it should only be carried out provided they are not breeding (either sex) and are released with minimum delay in their original habitat. No attempt should be made to tame any animal so taken as it jeopardizes their survival.

Hibernating animals should never be awakened for photography.

Specially Protected Animals
Threatened species such as Otters, Red Squirrels and Dormice are given full protection under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. The restrictions on photographing these species at their places of shelter are exactly the same as those for nesting birds. Not all protected species have regular places of shelter; these include two reptiles, two amphibians and several very rare butterflies and moths. The best rule is, ‘if in doubt, don't’. For example do not move objects in the habitat in search of smooth snakes to photograph.

Bats need special care. Disturbance at or near a breeding colony of any bat may cause desertion of an otherwise safe site; all bats are specially protected and none may be disturbed or photographed in a roost except with a licence from the appropriate Statutory Nature Conservation body (see back page). Bats are acutely sensitive to disturbance. There is evidence that important hibernation sites have been permanently deserted as a result of disturbance caused by photography. Licences to photograph are normally issued only to experienced bat workers.

No fully protected species may be taken from the wild without a licence, and taking means any form of capture including the use of butterfly nets.

Some further animals, included on Schedule 6 of the Act, are protected from trapping, and these include shrews, hedgehogs and pine martens. If you need to trap these species in order to photograph them you must apply for a licence.

Disturbance of any European protected species anywhere is an offence3 under the Habitat Regulations 1994.

Other Animals
For cold-blooded animals and invertebrates, temporary removal from the wild to a studio or vivarium (or aquarium) for photography is not recommended, where practicable field photographs are to be preferred. If a subject is removed from the wild for photography it should be released as soon as possible in its original habitat.

It is illegal to take from the wild, species listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, or take by means such as live-traps, species on Schedule 6. Insect photographers should be familiar with those species which may not be taken without a licence.

Chilling or anaesthesia for quietening invertebrates should not be undertaken.

When microhabitats (e.g. tree-bark, beach rocks, etc.) have been disturbed, they should be restored after the photography.

There should be no damage to habitat; any that does occur may be illegal on nature reserves, or SSSIs, even if the landowner has given permission.

Plants
Photographers should be clear about existing legislation. It is an offence3 to uproot any wild plant without the permission of the landowner or his tenant. For over a hundred very threatened plants, including the rarest orchids, the law extends to picking, so any damage to surrounding vegetation, which may include young plants, must be avoided. If photography comes to be seen as a threat, rather than an aid, to rare plant conservation, pressures may mount for more restrictive legislation such as giving protected plants at flowering time similar protection to that enjoyed by Schedule 1 birds at nesting time.

No rarity should ever be picked (still less dug up) for studio photography, or to facilitate the in situ photography of another specimen. Nor should any part of one be removed to facilitate the photography of another plant.

For some subjects (botanical/fungi/etc) some ‘gardening’ (i.e. tidying up of the surrounding vegetation) may be necessary. This should be kept to a minimum to avoid exposing the subject to predators, people, or weather. Plants or branches should be tied back rather than cut off and the site restored to as natural a condition as possible after any photo-graphic session. The aim should always be to leave no obvious signs of disturbance.

If an image of a rarity is to be published or exhibited, care should be taken that the site location is not accidentally given away. Take care that your photograph does not contain any clues as to the whereabouts of the specimen; this is particularly important in wide-angle photographs. Sites of rarities should never deliberately be disclosed except for conservation purposes.

Fungi
Other than a few very common species, it is rarely possible to identify fungi either in situ or from a photograph; a photograph of an unidentified or incorrectly identified species is of very limited value. Therefore it is usually necessary to collect a specimen after photographing them. This should be done with a knife rather than the fingers, taking care to collect the entire specimen including any base which may be immersed in the substrate. Notes should be made of the substrate (in particular for mycorrhyzal genera) and any associated organisms, as this may aid identification.

One of the first principles of collecting is to leave the environment as close as possible to the state in which it was found. Any logs which are rolled over should be returned to their original position.

If working as a group, then only the most experienced mycologist should collect specimens as his analysis can later be communicated to the other photographers. He/she may need to collect five or six specimens of differing ages to enable a mycologist to make an accurate identification after microscopic analysis, and also have sufficient specimens left over to store in a herbarium for future reference. It may not be necessary to collect the entire specimen in the case of very large species, i.e. brackets, as a wedge taken from the side is often sufficient.

Be aware that some public open spaces are subject to local bye-laws that may prohibit collecting. Four species are legally protected from collection anywhere in England, Scotland and Wales, even for scientific purposes, by Schedule 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (species covered are Hericium erinaceum, Piptoporus quercinum, Boletus regius and Battarea phalloides).

The Truth of the final Image
A nature photograph should convey the essential truth of what the photographer saw at the time it was taken.

No radical changes should be made to the original photograph, nor additions made from any source, whether during processing in the darkroom, or through digital/electronic manipulation. The removal of minor blemishes or distractions is permissible.

Legislation and Schedules

The photographer should be aware of the appropriate sections of the following, and any subsequent ‘amendments’:
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
The Wildlife ( Northern Ireland) Order 1985.
Protection of Badgers Act 1992.
The Butterfly Society Conservation Code.
Botanical Society of the British Isles (BSBI) list of rare plants and Code of Conduct.
The RSPB leaflet ‘Bird Photography and the Law’.
The Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc.) Regulations 1994.
The Countryside & Rights of Way Act 2000
Natural Environment & Rural Communities Act 2006

For more information on the protection of species and habitats:
The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds,
The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire, SG19 2DL
www.rspb.org.uk

Natural England,
1 East Parade, Sheffield, S1 2ET
www.naturalengland.org.uk

Scottish Natural Heritage,
Great Glen House, Leachkin Road, Inverness, IV3 8NW
www.snh.org.uk

Countryside Council for Wales,
Maes y Ffynnon, Penrhosgarnedd, Bangor, Gwynedd, LL57 2DW
www.ccw.gov.uk

Partnership for Action against Wildlife Crime (PAW)/DEFRA
www.defra.gov.uk/paw/
 
The Emergency Guide: How Not to Disturb Seals

This is an educated guess at some pressing issues for people visiting Donna Nook this weekend. I am by no means an expert on seals, but I feel I have a decent understanding of animal behaviour and knowing wrong from right regarding our behaviour around seals.

Firstly, it is important to realise by getting close to a seal or letting a seal get close to you, you are putting yourself at risk. Their teeth are sharp and contain, like most animals, bacteria that do not agree with humans. As far as I am aware, a bite can lead to amputation via infection. ‘Seal Finger’ is the most common injury/infection caused by a seal bite. It is an infection, usually in the finger after a bite or contamination through an open wound during contact with seals. Something resembling a mozzie bite will appear after 2hrs or anywhere up until 4days. Untreated it can cause all kinds of problems! (Baker et. al. 1998). I cannot find a reference for it but I am pretty sure that catching a wiff of a seals breath can also cause infection. I was told this during a seal/whale rescue course, getting close enough to a seal to exchange a breath is too close!

If/when a seal pup approaches you, which has happened to many, it is advisable to move away. This is for two reasons, (1) for your safety (see above) and (2) for its safety. It is not for humans to know what a seal thinks but for a seal pup to approach a human willingly is not ‘normal/natural’ behaviour. Therefore it is more than likely to be confused and you are therefore interfering and potentially harming it. I would go on the theory that, if the pup is young enough to confuse you for its mother it is young enough to need a regular supply of its mother’s milk. It is therefore advisable to move away, slowly and if you’re lucky enough, witness the mother returning to tend to its pup. Remember the smell of your cloths ie detergent and body oder will be picked up by the mother. I will not wash with soap and also wear my 'photography cloths' not washed in a while and hung in my shed, this will limit the 'human' oders that can be passed on to or near the seal.

After a number of weeks (2-4) the mother leaves the pup to fend for itself. These pups are not fair game to harass by getting close. The pups are still young and can be easily distressed. Talking from previous experience, I approached a pup this age and it was fine with my presence as I took my time etc. People approached quickly from behind me and it became aggressive to their and ultimately my presence. The pup closed the distance between itself and me very quickly and was keen to tell me who was boss. I learnt too things, the speed of the seals on land is deceptive, even at this age and that each seal is different. Some seals of this age are not too worried about being approached (correctly) whereas other seals will move away as soon as they see you coming.

Adult seals are a different ball game. Get close at your own peril. At Donna Nook, the beach colony first thing in the morning is enormous. I was there early enough to witness this. It is an impressive sight. Come the late morning many/most have fled. If photographers were not there, I am pretty sure these seals would have still been there at this time. Therefore, simply by approaching the colony some more apprehensive seals will flee. I guess these seals will have to lump it, as I am sure photographers will continue to photograph on the beach (despite my earlier ranting). However, I think it is good to have it in mind that simply being there you are disturbing the natural behaviour of the colony.

I want to say now that I do not think getting close to any seal is good. I do not think it is sensible regarding your own safety others around you or the animals. I am telling/suggesting the following because I think people will approach seals regardless of what I think or say or write. I think people will do it and therefore I think they should do it as carefully and respectfully as possible. I will also add that it takes time, a lot of patience and a substantial amount of risk, to you, your equipment and to the seals. This is a disclaimer, and I stand to be corrected on any aspect. I SUGGEST YOU DO NOT APPROACH SEALS.

If you still feel it is absolutely vital you do then please follow these suggestions to limit the amount of stress to the animals.

1) One final time do not approach the seals.

2) They will see you any way, camouflage is not the order of the day. In a low crouched position and a slow approach, a very slow approach. When a seal turns to look sink down on to your belly and wait 5-10mins. Let them become comfortable with your presence. Then move on.

3) Moving on may be 2-3ft at a time, then wait, and move.

4) At this point I would say if more than 5 seals make a dash for the sea. I would stop accept defeat take a pic and move slowly back. It is likely if one goes it will set of a stampede. Careful, careful.

5) Rolling is a good technique and less stressful on your elbows and knees, again slowly and be careful not to get sand on your lens

6) Look and wait for them to settle down. You need to convince them that you are not a threat. The minute you see a pup in amongst the colony stop and turn around slowly. Panic one near the pup and the mother will flee with the rest.

7) Don’t approach the seals.

8) I suggest approaching them from UP-WIND, there is no cover and to startle one would startle them all. Therefore if they know you are there they can decide when you are too close. Too close is when they are continuously looking at you and not settling. They will take it in turns, as one looks the other will look away to find its escape route. When they move you have stepped over the/their line.

9) Up-wind helps your voice to travel!!! Sing to them. A calming song or whistle. It will let them know that you (the threat) does not mind being seen. Therefore you cannot be hunting as hunters approach with stealth. Singing is funny as if nothing else they are very confused.

10) So head to toe in sand, wet through, lens covered, singing to a colony
of seals...do you really want to!? From this position edge closer, compose your shot, take it and move out. ‘Moving out’ is doing exactly what you did to get there. If you turn your back and stand up, and therefore not see the seals go to the sea does not mean it isn’t happening! After at least three times the distance you were to the seal slowly get into a crouching position and start moving away. You can stand when your next to Tasty Treats.

Things to consider when you are on the beach:

A. If you see people in the distance heading your way don’t start an approach. They will see you close think it is ok and walk right up to you. It is frustrating for you and will definitely scare the seals.

B. If you estimate that there is only 5 times more seals than photographers then you are too late. The colony is in the water, the photographers on the beach have already done the damage and the seals are already stressed. Turn around and remember this post: http://niallbenvie.churchilljohnson.co.uk/blog/?p=2867.

C. Think again, do I really need to get close to the seals.

D. Big groups crowded together in front of the colony is ominous and threatening to seals and present photographers. If you are in a big group meet further up the beach or visit Tasty Treats (I’m not on commission, just lovely ladies) and discuss you plan of action and Peters thread before setting foot on the beach.

E. Flashes should be left in the car! No one will be able to acquire scientific evidence to prove the increase in stress levels of a seal when a flash is set of NEAR it. However, a friend of mine flashed me (with a flash) the other day and I was able to tell her to ‘leave me alone’ and she was able to run away.

I think/hope I have covered everything. If I have missed anything please PM me and I will add it or ask a direct question, therefore you won’t have to quote this mammoth post. Peter I hope I have not hijacked something you were planning to do, I just thought it would be of benefit if people could have a read before they went to the Nook.

Please note I have not mentioned ‘Acceptable distances to approach a seal’, this is because I don’t know and I don’t think there is an acceptable distance. I would not want to write something that may endanger someone or a seal.

One last time...all together...DO NOT APPROACH THE SEALS, REALLY!


Regards
 
Great set of advice from BobbyBlue there. Thanks for that.

I'm a big believer at DN on travelling light, not changing lenses and keeping distance. I will only be taking a 400 prime on a 1.6 crop body on my next trip. For me, low and distant tends to be a more pleasing picture than higher and close anyway.
 
Hi,

Thanks to both BobbyBlue and Pete W for their sets of advice. Pete's is obviously not specific to seals but still impresses the importance of the care and attention required in all spheres of wildlife photography.

As for BobbyBlue's post, dont worry - I am not at all offended that you did this post before me. It is much more important that this information gets out there than whose mouth it comes from. As for whether you are qualified to give this advice, I think your marine medic qualification (I cant remember the exact words) and zoology degree certainly make you qualified enough to comment.

I myself have a biology degree. Although this is not quite as relevant as a zoology degree and marine medic qualification I hope this will at least allow me to be taken seriously.

Firstly, let me reintegrate what BobbyBlue said about approaching seals from upwind. Donna Nook is a large flat beach and the only things that stand out against this naturally are seals. Therefore, the seals will definitely recognise you as something unusual no matter how hard you stalk them (unless of course you have seal deodrant and a seal suit!).

Getting close to them is not a matter of making yourself not invisible, but unthreatening, which equates to as inhuman as possible. This includes posture, (lying down/crawling) smell, (clothes that smell as little of human as possible and washing in water, not soap) sound, (singing to the seals) and movement (rolling like the seals do).

If you do get close to the seals make sure you make no sudden movements or dramatically change your position. If you need to recompose do not sit/stand up to do so. Simply roll/crawl to the desired position slowly. This includes moving away from the seals, roll and crawl all the way!

Also, one point BobbyBlue did not mention is that it is best to leave your bags as far away from the colony as possible. There are four main reasons behind this:

1) Lugging bags around will make you appear larger and more threatening.
2) It prevents seals from squashing and potentially ruining your equipment while your back is turned.
3) It stops seals damaging themselves by messing with your equipment.
4) You should not be changing lenses on the beach anyway. You will simply get sand in your camera and you should always be shooting seals from as far as you can, i.e. with your longest lens. Things you may need (e.g. batteries/memory cards) can be carried in firmly sealed pockets. Make sure they are sand tight otherwise you will end up with very sandy datacards.

Make sure that your bags are somewhere that will remain dry! Tides have a tendency to come in and out washing over anything in their path (take heed Knut!). I learned this lesson after the tide once reached my bag at Donna Nook, luckily turning after only getting my bag mildly moist.

Regards,

Peter
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top