Printable View
Are there any guidelines as far as posts are concerned here on this forum ? I can not recall seeing any snowy / raptor images here that included the mouse or respective bait. I personally have quite a few images that in my eyes would benefit with the inclusion of the mouse but clone him out so as not to start WWIII. What ever is the general feeling of the members here is what I will respect.
Hey Mike,
Don't take the mouse/prey out!!! I personally love that..........it's nature! IMO we shouldn't PC it ............like it doesn't happen. What's the difference between a mouse.........or the fish ones I've posted? I haven't recieved any complaints.
IMO.....go for it,
Roman
Personally, I think that if one is going to engage in a practice that is somewhat controversial, then one should be NOT try to gloss over what is being done. If a photographer is truly convinced that there is nothing wrong with baiting, then there is no reason to clone the bait out (unless it happens to be a particularly gory scene).
As I've mentioned before, I'll feed bait fish to birds, but the idea of a mouse is a bit harder for me. That is completely illogical when you think about it and I'm certainly not going to bash anyone who baits. I enjoy the resulting images just fine.
I do question a persons motivations for doing so when the bait is cloned out though.
To me it spoils it when I see a great photograph of a wild bird going after an obviously bought pet store mouse. To me there is nothing wrong in cloning it out and indicating that the subject was baited. I'm also sure that most baited images had the mouse outside the frame to begin with anyways. If it were a wild vole or other type of wild prey then yes, that would be very cool to leave it in!! :-) With the Northern Hawk-owl situation earlier and then the Snowies it has come to a point where people indicate whenever an owl was NOT baited !
Hi All,
Did I misunderstand? I thought we were talking about posting.........and not disclosing. If you bait.........IMO.......you must disclose! Same goes for captive! I thought Mike was worried about the "gory" nature of things.........and not the ethics.
Roman
An image would have much more impact in my eyes if the food/prey was present in the frame, of course noted that is was baited.
That said I also think an image with a full spread bank with a piece of wonder bread in the frame would not look too good (Shell WPTY 2007 comp comes to mind).
So it think the answer should really be up to the person and on a image by image basis.
Robert
Robert, which shot was that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert O'Toole
Hi Phil,
In 2007 Shell WPTY included 3 images that I thought the human element really ruined the image for me. One category winner, a white shark breaching (havent seen that before :)) baited with a rubber seal, the mink with the slice of bread, and a group of gulls figthing for bread. Sorry I dont remember the categories or page numbers for reference and I dont have the book to look them up.
BTW, rasied in So Cal I have been a fan of your work for years.
Robert
Thanks Robert, I'll look those up. I'm a fan of your images too, particularly that final wave shot you have in your website portfolio!
If the image that you want to make should have bait in it, then leave it. If your vision of the scene is cleaner and is to showcase just the bird, then clone out those distractions. It's your image, your art, and solely your decision. You don't have to ask anyone.
If one uses an electroic bird call should that be admitted to as well? FWIW, 90+% of "pet store mice" are sold as food for captive snakes.
I would hope that folks using tapes to bring the birds into range would state so in their posts. If not, I will ask the question as 99% of the time I know anyway <smile> Same goes for feeders and baths.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Campbell
I would be curious to know why it matters.
On the issue crop/not to crop or clone/not to clone, you are the artist, you decide.
As to ethics of baiting, what I interpreted from Mike's discussion on his owl thread, is that the feeding practice to entice the owls closer, could have possibly resulted in the owls waiting/queuing for the "feeding" session rather than fend for themselves naturally in the nature. If this then becomes a commercial practice ie someone somewhere is charging the photographer to have an opportunity to create an image of an owl catching it's prey (or should I use "bait"), then the "practice" is for me personally unethical, measured against my personal nature value system. My reasoning being that when such commercial practice seizes to exist, a couple of owls could possibly die because they cannot fend for themselves.
We have an issue here in South Africa called "canned" lions (I am sure most of you have seen some of the Discovery and NatGeo videos on that issue) and the baiting of owls for a commercial reason would then fall within the same category for me aka "canned" snowies.
Please, it is a personal interpretation of what I have read between the lines, my facts could be totally wrong.
Geurt,
I understand your position and in the right circumstances it could happen but I think the odds of the average photographer on his or her own baiting often enouigh to cause a problem are pretty slim.
This also makes me think about backyard feeders and water sources. Is this an unethical process as the birds seem to learn very quickly where they can get a free meal and a drink without hunting for it?
IMO, giving food to a wild bird could never harm the bird or cause its death (ht lone exception that I could think of would be fisherman discarding the carcasses of fileted fish in spots where pelicans might attempt to swallow them and wind up choking on them...)
Remember this post is not about the ethics of "baiting of feeding". If you want that type of discussion I can point you to a not very pretty thread on another forum. I hope this does not get started here. Just look at a thread here "Remove that distraction" to see where this will go as varying opinions abound. The op simply is looking at the graffic nature of inclusion of the prey not someones opinion on the ethics of it all.
Mike, as for me leave them in !
Todd
What I was initially getting at but you said it better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd Frost
No need for things to ugly as long as we all act like adults and discuss rather than preach or point fingers. Seems that has been the case thus far. Nothing here has offended me anyway.
I am very pleased with the tone of BPN as a whole. While folks have disagreed often, it has always been done civilly and with respect. We are proud to have large community of happy folks and aim to keep it that way ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Campbell
If I may add my opinion .... if it's baited then show the bait ... otherwise we have different criteria all the time. For example, for a baited eagle, we leave in the fish, but for a snowy we clone the mouse ... mmmm !!
As for baths and feeders, ok you probably entice them to something that they can get used to and "expect" ... such as the canned lions that Geurt spoke about .... but bird calls !!!!!, surely nothing wrong there right?
As Doug said, what does it matter of a bird call or sound player is used?
Artie, you said that giving food to a wild bird could never harm the bird or cause its death. My outdoor experience and strong repeated advice by all forest service and naturalist sources say never feed a wild animal. Is there something unique about birds that is different?
The reason for "never feed a wild animal" is habituation. Not in the sense that the animal will forget how to hunt, but that the animal will loose its fear of humans and even seek out humans as a source of food. With something like a bear, that can be a problem because of the dangers posed. With a bird, I don't think I've heard many "bird eats man" stories.
I think a lot of the leave the bait or clone the bait talk is based on how we humans perceive fuzzy, expressive things that are sometimes kept as pets vice the way we perceive scaly, non-expressive things like fish.
As for bird calls, they can really mess with birds in their nesting territory and screw up the whole biological process.
Why should bait or artificial attraction (Calls, feeders, etc) of any type be disclosed?
One reason is that the new photographer might see all these wonderful snowy images (insert songbird on a perch lured in by a water drip if you like) and wonder why he or she isn't getting the same results. That could lead to frustration and the photographer quitting the hobby / business whatever too soon. Some might say good riddens if the person wasn't dedicated enough to do the research to find out. I'm not picking sides :D
