Slim Sreedharan read our post on “Birding Ethics: For Photographers, by Photographers” recently. It reminded him of a paper he wrote some 20 years ago during Singapore’s Jurong Bird Park Bird Photography contests in the late eighties, when he was one of the judges. The paper is still currently relevant as it contains many useful hints on how not to disturb the birds when photographing them.

“This piece was written for would-be wildlife photographers motivated by a genuine love for their subjects. Sadly, such people appear to be in short supply these days, with more and more people taking such pictures just to make money or win competitions, even if it means endangering or killing the subject.

“Given the conservation problems of today, a wildlife photographer without a sound ethical approach and a genuine concern for the welfare of his subject is worthy of little more than contempt, worse than a hunter.

“Careless conduct can drive the animal away from the area or wreck its breeding cycle. When dealing with endangered species, this only makes things worse, and may lead to the extinction of the species.

“However good the equipment, a photograph can only be as good (or as bad) as the person behind the camera! In the final analysis, this human element is every bit as important as all the gadgets and accessories acquired in order to take good photographs.

“The key is to learn as much as possible about your subjects. And of its environment too, lest you endanger other animals in the same habitat while trying to get close to your subject.

“The rarer the species, the greater one’s knowledge should be and the more care one must exercise when approaching them.

“This is particularly so when working in other countries - for all you know, you may be dealing with a subject already on the brink of extinction. Your research could well make a difference to your photographs, lift them out of the ordinary. If you are unsure of your facts, play the umpire. Give the benefit of the doubt to the animal and get the picture some other day, or in some other place, rather than endanger your subject.

“In this age of the global village and cheap airfares, a most worrying trend I have recently noted is the tendency shown by some photographers to shed all care and inhibitions when working in less developed countries.

“Some of this ilk, even from the most prestigious organisations and agencies, have been seen in Sabah, Sarawak and Kalimantan, taking photographs of captive birds by putting them in artificial cages filled with tropical foliage to simulate natural surroundings.

“For all their pious talk about habit depletion and endangered wildlife, rather than set higher standards, they capture wildlife for photographic purposes, aided and abetted by equally pious-sounding scientists and conservationists from Europe and America!

“Breeding behaviour is fascinating and yields fine pictures. Yet, it is also a time when the animal is at its most vulnerable. Care must be taken to minimise risk to the subject and its environment. Stalking or harassing it will separate young ones from the parents and put them at risk.

“The area around the nest is often cleared of leaves and twigs that may effect the composition. Quite frequently, this is taken to extremes, such that it exposes the nest and endangers the young ones.

“A simpler, and more effective method, is simply to tie back all unwanted herbage with a short length of string. And, of course, to remove it after each photo session.

“When using photographic hides, it is particularly important not to leave the hide unattended or to visit it so frequently as to leave a clear trail to and from the nest. This may provoke the parents into abandoning the nest or enable predators to find the breeding site.

“When and where to place a hide often depends on the subject. They are much like humans. Some will permit closer approach than others. Patiently watching your subject as it approaches and leaves the nest, and its reaction to your presence, will help you decide where and how close to place your hide.

“As a general rule, it is always better to place the hide as far away as possible from the nest to begin with, then move it closer little by little over a few days. Or even use a long lens. This has an advantage - a noisy shutter will not startle them too much.

“Knowing exactly when to put up the hide is also important - get it up too early in the breeding cycle and the birds will readily desert the nests and eggs. They are less likely to do so once the young ones have hatched out.

“Once the hide is in place, the birds should be given time to accept it before the hide is moved any closer. It is best to move the hide late in the afternoon to give them time to accept it and get back to the nest before nightfall.

“It would also be wise to keep an eye on the weather. Going in and out of the hide during bad weather may frighten the parents off the nest and expose the young ones to the weather.

“Once inside the hide, never rush your pictures. The birds will be nervous to begin with, so take your time and let the birds settle down. If they do not, or are too distressed by your presence, never hesitate to pull out. Try again the next day - or sacrifice your pictures altogether.

“Do not attempt to handle young birds in a nest. As the fledglings get older, they become extremely wary and, when frightened, are likely to “explode”, scatter every which way they can!

“Should this happen, be careful when searching for them in tall grass - you may step on them. If they are very young, and you have someone to help you, and put them back into the nest one at a time, keeping them covered until they settle down again.

“If they are almost fully grown and can fly, they may be impossible to recover. It should never have happened in the first place but it might be better at this point to cut your losses and leave the area at once. With luck, attracted by distress calls from the young ones, the parents may come back.

“Finally, never divulge the location of a breeding site to anyone else.

“I remember a situation when I was preparing to photograph a rare bird on the Ash Ranges in Surrey. The site was a secret known only to a select few. Somehow, someone blabbed, and before too long, the place was crawling with all sorts of twitchers. I lost the picture but the loss was far more serious - the bird abandoned the nest.

“Then, again, there was the Hobby’s nest at Fleet, which we had watched carefully for a long time. Before we felt the young ones were ready for our approach, someone not only climbed up to destroy the nest but also killed the young chicks.”

Images by Slim Sreedharan: Top left to right, Blue-winged Pitta, Common Kingfisher and Jumbu Fruit Dove. Bottom left to right: Fire-tufted Barbet, Blue-winged Leafbird and Purple Swamphen.

Teo, Allan & Y. C. Wee, 2009. Observations at a nest of Malayan Whistling Thrush Myophonus robinsoni in the Cameron Highlands, Malaysa. BirdingASIA 11: 95-97.

The above publication, just off the press, has attracted the attention of David Bakewell, Lim Kim Chye and Dr Anuar Shahrul. These three researchers are currently conducting a year-long study to clarify identification criteria and status of the Blue and Malaysian Whistling Thrush in Peninsular Malaysia. Their study involves capturing, photographing, measuring and subsequent release of whistling thrushes at various locations. These three researchers are of the opinion, based on photographs published with the above paper, that the bird is a Blue Whistling Thrush of the race dicrorhynchus. In their view, “this dull race of Blue Whistling Thrush is rather commonly misidentified as Malayan…”

The authors welcome their comment and look forward to the eventual publication of their findings and conclusions. It is through scientific interaction like this that we build on our knowledge and in the process learn from one another. After all, this is what science is all about.

The above comment, coming weeks after the above paper was published, brings to mind two very important points.

1. The camera is fast becoming an indispensible tool in modern-day birding – for serious birders, not necessarily for recreational birdwatchers. A clear, crisp image of a bird that is published in a scientific journal will allow specialists researchers to correct a misidentification if there is one. In the absence of photographic evidence, a misidentification can never be corrected and the mistake will be buried forever.

2. The importance of publishing findings and observations in scientific journals can never be over-stressed. Privately circulated newsletters and web-publications have their use. They are useful mainly to citizen scientists and maybe a few professional scientists. But these informal publications do not always reach those who matter – researchers and scientists who are specialists in their own fields.

The above publication on the Malaysian Whistling Thrush has been web-published as far back as March 2008 in five parts: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, with images attached. There is also a post on whistling-thrushes in Malaysia.

However, these did not attract the attention of serious researchers. And if they did, maybe these informal publications were not taken seriously. Only when the consolidated observations were formally published in a scientific journal, in this case BirdingASIA, were the contents taken seriously.

Irfan Choo’s studies of the Dark-sided Flycatcher (Muscicapa sibirica) catching and then swallowing a long-horned grasshopper (Family: Tettigoniidae) are dedicated to skeptics who are seldom convinced that an invertebrate caught by a bird is food. Yes, sometimes the food may be vomited out, like with some brightly coloured butterfly or moth because they may be poisonous or distasteful. However, in such cases the vomiting would be instantaneous and a photographer would be well aware of the event.

Can skeptics be traditional birdwatchers, uncomfortable with the recent popularity of bird photography? However, it should be noted that bird photographers are fast convincing the more progressive birdwatchers of the importance of images in birdwatching. Not convinced? Then check out this LINK.

Reflect back to the time when images did not play any significant role in birdwatching. The many reports of birds taking insects, spiders, snails, fruits, etc. were then simply reported and accepted without question. Were these “foods” actually eaten and not subsequently vomited out? Were they actually taken as food or, as a skeptic once suggested, a “toy” that birds sometimes simply pick up for amusement?

A new scientific paper, “The role of the camera in birdwatching in Singapore” has just been published in the on-lime journal, Nature in Singapore [2009, Vol. 2: 183-191 by Tsang, K. C., R. Subaraj & Y. C. Wee]. You can get a PDF copy of the paper HERE (#27).

Bird watching in Singapore will never be the same again - ever since bird photographer descended on the scene in early 2000s. The spectacular images of birds and their behaviour that photographers captured with their digital cameras (including those captured with conventional films) have three important impact on birdwatching…

Identifying birds
1. Cameras and images are showing up the weakness of the Records Committee (RC) of the Nature Society (Singapore)’s Bird Group. A number of records have been or need to be retracted due to re-examination of photographic evidence eg. mis-identification of a kentish plover (Charadrius alexandrinus) for a long-billed plover (C. placidus) and the questionable inclusion of the Western Marsh Harrier (Circus aeruginosus) in the checklist. Well, we live and learn, after all, nobody is perfect! What of the others where no images are available?

2. With images as evidence, the RC cannot simply dismiss claims by birdwatchers of seeing unrecorded species as “lack of evidence”, as in the past. The Asian Emerald Cuckoo (Chrysococcyx maculatus) was recently accepted as a new record for Singapore – with photographic evidence, even though it took 23 months to do so.

3. An old image allowed the RC to claim that the first sighting of the Jerdon’s baza (Aviceda jerdoni) should be seven years earlier. It would have helped shore up the credibility of the RC had the old image been published before, rather than after, the claim in BirdingAsia was made. However, to date, the old photograph has yet to be published. So the claims is still ringing hollow… and is this science?

Food and feeding behaviour
1. Now we have proof of whatever species of birds we report taking specific foods. In the past we take the submitted observations in good faith. With images, we can even query whether the particular bird actually swallowed the food and if so, whether it eventually spit it out. Or whether the bird was actually treating the food as a plaything.

2. Images allow specialist biologists to identify the foods at their leisure. It is also possible to identify the plant or animal foods to the generic or even specific level.

3. Images allow us to know whether the bird bites, swallows or crush the foods; cast pellets later on…

Bird behaviour
1. Pollinating of mistletoe flowers by Blue-crowned Hanging Parrot (Loriculus galgulus) and Scarlet-backed Flowerpecker (Dicaeum cruentatum) when the birds applies slight pressure on the flower buds to get at the nectar. This is a split-second action, the significance of which is usually missed when viewed through the binoculars.

2. Keeping detailed records of breeding behaviour of Malaysian Plover (Charadrius peronii), Zebra Dove (Geopelia striata) and Little Tern (Sterna sumatrana) with photographic records.

Not all birdwatchers are convinced that the camera is here to stay. A few of the more progressive ones are now toting a camera when out in the field. But there are others who are feeling threatened… But why the need to feel threatened? After all, birdwatching is a pastime and if you are happy just looking at birds, so be it. Go out and have fun twitching.

Image of photographers at Bidadari by Lena Chow.

“I must confess that I am rather new to the world of birding and bird photography. Apart from all the interesting observations posted on the BESGroup blog, I owe much to individuals such as Subaraj, Gim Cheong, Dr Ho Hua Chew, Danny Lau, Con Foley and Doreen Ang for showing me how to hear and see what I would otherwise miss out, whether in the forest or out in open habitats.

“That said, I would like to share some observations of group behaviour (of humans not birds) seen in the wake of the recent excitement over the Oriental Dwarf Kingfisher (Cyex erithacus erithacus). In the first week of the sighting of the bird at its location by a popular jogging trail, I am glad to have enjoyed the company and knowledge of a number of photographers who also delighted in the other avian fauna of the general area, from rambunctious drongos and curious woodpeckers to the bevy of babblers, bulbuls and Siberian Blue Robins (Luscinia cyane) that descended to a nearby pool for their evening bath. All this activity kept everyone occupied and entertained before the elusive kingfisher finally made its appearance. I am told latecomers to the site even enjoyed the additional sight of Buffy Fish Owls (Ketupa ketupu) and Brown Hawk Owls (Ninox scutulata).

“After a week away from the reserves, I took the opportunity to drop by another location (1, 2) where an Oriental Dwarf Kingfisher had been regularly seen. A group of 8-9 other photographers were already at the site. As mentioned, I am fairly new to this scene and so consider myself not too attuned to the norms of the pursuit. So while awaiting the bird, I just watched what the others were doing, or wandered off on my own to see if I could find anything interesting. A little away from the hotspot, a few bulbuls were bathing in a part of the stream that flowed beneath a thicket of lianes and low shrubs. After they were done, a couple flew up towards the boardwalk, giving an opportunity for some shots of what I believe are Cream-vented Bulbuls (Pycnonotus simplex), an uncommon and nationally near-threatened resident (above left). There was also a colugo (Cynocephalus variegates) which someone spotted on a tree trunk (above right). I could also see in the stream below various small schooling fishes being stalked by a snakehead (Channa sp.).

“Returning to the group where I met a friend who had just arrived, I found that somebody had switched on an audio recording of what appeared to be amorphous jungle sounds and bird calls. I am not sure if this is akin to the practice of using bird calls to draw out certain birds, as the sound was to me like static that blurred out the ambient forest we were in. The kingfisher appeared at last but confined itself to a distant perch above a stream that afforded just one passable viewpoint, to which the photographers took turns to occupy and shoot their target. I understand that on other days, the bird had chosen quite prominent and photographically ideal perches, and some photographers were able to catch it in action feeding on freshwater prawns and small frogs. This time, the bird remained steadfastly at its far off perch. At some point, one of the photographers climbed over the boardwalk and positioned himself by a tree trunk about 4-5 m away from the bird, where he shot a few photos which I gather he was quite pleased with. I must say it was quite tempting to join him down there, as I was one of the few there unencumbered by a tripod. Some voices then asked the photographer who went down to try to flush the bird, probably hoping to get it to fly to a more amenable perch. There were suggestions of shaking a branch or palm leaf or even throwing things in the direction of the bird to get it to move.

“At that point and after some discussion, my friend and I decided it would be better to leave as we were not quite at ease with what was taking place. It was a fairly sizeable gathering, so you could say I was too birdlike (i.e. chicken) to voice out in the face of uneven group dynamics. My friend kindly dropped me off near the place where I sighted the earlier kingfisher which I thought would have been fairly deserted by this time. There were only five photographers (including myself) who waited for the bird. In the meantime, a Stork-billed Kingfisher (Halcyon capensis) (above) fished nearby, while the bulbuls, babblers and robins turned out in sequence.

“A surprise was a female Asian Paradise Flycatcher (Terpsiphone paradisi), which fluttered awhile around the kingfisher’s favourite perch (right). I did not know the other people there and as I was tired, I did not talk much to them. At some point, however, I saw one of the photographers descending into the vegetation with a pair of scissors. I asked him what he was doing and he replied that he wanted to remove a leaf blocking the view. I said he shouldn’t be doing that and he responded with ‘Why?’ But he returned to the boardwalk without completing his task and I decided against further conversation. A little later, a couple of fly fishermen came by and swung their rods almost at the spot where the kingfisher would perch. Fortunately, an elderly passer-by told them to stop, as this was not a designated fishing area, and they went off. The kingfisher showed up a little after sunset but personally I was no longer in the mind to shoot it as the evening’s observations had left me with uneasy feelings as to whether it would be wise to share such sightings with the community at large in the future.

“What do readers think?”

Marcus Ng
13th February 2009

NOTE:
Sometime in the early 2000s, a group of bird photographers approached the President of the Nature Society (Singapore) with an offer of revitalising the then dormant Photo Group. Unfortunately the photographers’ overture was spurned. Maybe birdwatchers then were uncomfortable sharing their turf and expertise with another group stalking birds. Be that as it may, the Nature Society missed it’s a golden opportunity to work closely with photographers and in the process share with these newcomers some of the birdwatchers’ field ethics, especially in stalking and photographing birds, accumulated through years of fieldwork. After all, the best of birdwatchers, with their deep concern for the welfare of birds, surely did not start off as angels in the field.