I have patiently reread the postings generated on this thread and, as I
receive a digest, it is easier for me to respond in one message.
I did not mention photographers in my post as it was not designed to
cover every aspect of intrusion to a bird. Many nature magazines today
now refuse photos that show distress to the subjects involved, and using
playback to get bird photos is very controversial. The subject of
proximity to a bird and its territory and its effects can be reasoned
out by common sense, as much as anything. Whereby I am tempted to want
to limit playback for photographers, the reality is that a photographer
has to do what any field recordist needs to do, that is, get as close as
he can. In fact, because of the limitation of lenses, even modern ones,
he has to get a lot closer to get a publishable shot. When one is using
approach techniques for any purpose to get close to a bird, the result
is that, as we are noisy, clumsy humans, we usually drive the bird back,
force it to flee, or, at the best, alter its present behavior. In an
ideal world, our magazines, soundscapes, and video productions would
present great views of birds that are oblivious to our presence. A
photographer will do a great deal more damage trying to get close to a
bird than if he/she used playback responsibly to draw the bird. My beef
is that a photographer, in order to get that perfect shot, is far more
tempted to overdo it than a birder simply wanting to identify a bird
properly.
It is common sense that a birder, wanting to get a decent look, will
approach a bird persistently until he/she gets that view that satisfies
him. Playback, used properly, could do this in a fraction of the time,
especially if the bird is shy. Without sound, no one would see
tapaculos, antpittas, pittas, many babblers, and many other shy birds
without spending inordinate amounts of time in the field. Being in a
bird's territory for a length of time has a detrimental impact. One of
the best things any field worker could do, from a conservation
standpoint, is to be in and out as fast as possible. This is not always
realistic, especially for a worker intent on studying behaviour.
Conversely, we all could stand a few lessons from the Tom Brown school
of native stealth in the environment, and learn to co-exist better with
our nature subjects. I never said that playback proximity is OK whereas
other approaches are not. I am simply trying to compare the impact, from
my experience, of the various types of interactions between humans and
birds.
When I talked about the big picture, I need to address the conservation
issue because its importance today is incalculable with vanishing
habitat and species, without which, we would have nothing to record (a
direct reference to Bernie Krause's postings). Birding is a huge impetus
to this, even if many participants have very personal goals and needs
within it. For all of those who do travel to see things in person, there
are many more that are armchair devotees and they rely on media to
indulge their interest, and hence the importance of magazines and video
to promote their interest. In the end, there are not enough people who
put environment before living convenience, and that is why we continue
to see our natural resources dwindle. Birding tour operators have a
strong impact, particularly in Third World countries. The Manu area in
Peru, for example, has lodges and local operators now in full evidence.
When I first visited the Manu in 1989, there was very little. While a
wilderness purist might find this offensive, it is a testimony to
ecotourism. In order to promote conservation, we need it to provide a
viable living for all concerned.
In response to Martyn's comment about field experience (he is dead
right, there should be more talk about recording technique in the
field), I have been involved in birding for almost 40 years. I started
recording in the mid-Eighties, when birding tour companies first started
to thrive and the value of recording birds found a larger audience. I
have had a lot of field experience with birds and my impact on them. I
once found a Northern Harrier nest serendipitously as I was running an
inventory on one of the few prairie habitats left here in Southern
Ontario. Initially I was thrilled, but, when I returned a week later, I
found the nest abandoned. I did some research at that time and educated
myself more firmly in the consequences of my actions in the field. I
learned that many animals follow human trails, and, years later, I
picked up other tidbits, such as how toucans will follow birder's
actions in order to find nests and nestlings.
I understand that playback feels like cheating to some, but, the fact
is, we all have used technology to improve our ability to enjoy birds.
We have come a long way from our forefathers who used guns to further
their interest in birds. Some forms of interaction with birds are going
to be far less intrusive simply because they do not require as much
proximity and time with a bird than others. As this increases, we need
to increase ethical standards to care for our subjects. This forum has a
unique position to champion standards, just as long as we address all of
the issues surrounding why we are recording a bird.
Thanks for your patience with a long posting, I try to keep them few and
far between.
Scott Connop
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|