wow.. amazing how threads evolve from baiting to photojournalism ethics... ;) well evolution is part of life... but I wish to address the baiting issue once again...
I find it fascinating as it plays out with 2 apparent sides pro and con....
I almost find humor in the thought that a creature has struggled to find an area with more food and there is a discussion based on whether or not he should be fed... if it was me and I could hear and understand the conversation.. "oh.. dont feed him .. he wants to find food on his own"... Id be flabbergasted!.. lol..
no one can really know the fate of a given owl (lets use that since its central to the debate)... is it possible that not feeding it will cause its death? sounds like it COULD be possible... is it possible that feeding it could cause its death? hmmmmm sounds a little less plausible....
on the subject of habituating a certain owl... once again Im not sure I totally understand what the problem might be.. these owls are already fearless of man when they come south.. in fact the only reason you CAN bait them is that they have no (apparent) fear of man.... Ive seen a number of northern owls in the wild... they have treated me as an obstacle rather than a threat... this is good.. it means no one is "hurting" them... but I wish they had a bit more fear of vehicles...
I can understand people not wanting to see harm to wild creatures... I sure dont want to see that either.... I also understand the irony that sometimes research causes great harm to the creatures in the studies... I have a degree in fisheries and wildlife biology and have worked with field research before... in fisheries.. quite often in studies disruption, harm, even death was the immediate result of a study.. it was always hoped that it was for a good cause.... but who can say?
this is such a complicated subject on both sides... I think both sides need to try and understand how the other feels.. or sees things
