using calls to attract wildlife

...........Oh gosh, cut the anti hunting crap unless you are 100% vegan / vegetarian. If you aren't either of those, and still object to hunting, you are just a contract killer..............

 

 

Issue is much more complex. I am not vegetarian. Long time ago I did hunt in couple of seasons. I did not found hunt exiting, I did not enjoy it, so I stopped. When I hunted I ate all meat from kill (shared some with my friends).

 

My position against hunting applied mostly to cases like that:

 

1) Killing anything what is moving for fun, sport etc.

 

2) Killing for pleasure or to make somebody feels like Rambo (those specimens are usually very weak physically and mentally)

 

3) Issuing hunting license to anybody without checking if one has basic knowledge about hunted animals and guns

 

Nobody really can control first two. I have seen too many people like those and I feel I have right to not associate myself with them.

 

Because human nature is so complex and differ so much from one specimen to another I do not expect we all will understand each other.

 

Also, no I am not a contract killer. I prize my time and prefer to buy nice fresh meat in supermarket, or even better, buy one already cooked in good restaurant. I do not have adrenaline rush (or need for it) when hunting and can use this time if not for photography then to read a good book :). Again we all have different needs, instincts and values.

 

Do you really feel good or pleasure when killing something? Especially when is in scope view from a safe distance?

Alex do a google search:

 

Weigth of your car.

 

Weight of moose.

 

Compare

 

Good luck :)

Heck, Alex, I've used calls to attract animals for the purpose of poking sharp sticks between their ribs; I'm sure they (the animals) would much prefer photography...

 

There have been some valid points made here. One is that any time we cause an animal to deviate from its normal routine, there is a "stress" on the animal. Such stress may only be a slight increase in energy consumption, but it's worth keeping in mind that there are probably some animals and situations where that might reduce the animal's chances for success in it's animal endeavors (such as survival.)

 

OTOH, animals that come to a call are following their natural behaviors, so I don't see any conflict in calling the resulting photograph "natural." Keep in mind the comments about unwanted predators; it's neat to watch a coyote turn around and come at a dead run from a couple hundred yards away, less fun to turn around and find yourself eye-to-eye with a cougar.

 

Prey animals, such as deer, have been a staple in the diet of larger and more powerful predators for millions of years, and so are well equipped to deal with the occasional stressor. It's what they do; eat, run away, eat some more, fail to run, get eaten. Ignore anyone who looks at a deer and says, "Nice doggy."

 

Oh, and pay attention to the comments about moose. IMHO, calling a moose is a pisspoor idea unless you plan to kill it first.

 

Use common sense (that most uncommon of attributes) and don't overdo.

Mark, it isn't about feeling a rush as the life leaves the animal's body or anything; it's just

that it's a cheap and effective way to get meat for myself and a whole lot of other people.

Like it or not, as a meat eater you are a link in a chain that involves the death of an animal

so you can eat it. It just seems somewhat hypocritical to try to distance oneself from the kill

when you paid someone to do it.

 

By the way, I am not a fan of trophy hunting or other kinds of killing that do not result in the

consumption of the animal, with a few exceptions for safety.

No calls are needed.<div></div>

Andrew - somehow I see a difference between wild animals which form an essential part of the bio-diversity of this planet and the "domesticated" variety bred and grown purely as a food product. Presumably if the supermarket/butcher is cheaper and more convenient then there would be no need to hunt wild animals for food ?

 

Alan - as you say the only trouble with common sense is that it is not common enough and sadly can rarely be relied on - it is probably best therefore to just say "no".

 

Mark - I am with you most of the way - I just do not buy into the "big brave hunter" bit.

Bill, I think it came from the kind of the society I was living in. Most of them were city boys (most of them pushing papers this way or another all their life) visiting forest few times a year and some of them when get gun in their hands (often first time) were changing instantly showing a dart side of their mind.

 

Andrew I can justify (even if I do not like it) hunting for meat unnaturally overpopulated species like deer etc. In my case I found that cost of guns, ammo, freezers, gas (not to mention my time) were way much more expensive then trip to the store. And you have to be very good diplomat to make your wife believe your arguments as your guns collection is growing :).

Agreed. I too believe in hunting only those animals which are overabundant due to our

influence such as deer. And the wife? Just as I recommend with cameras and lenses, there's

time to justify things to her AFTER the purchase. After all, I don't expect my wife to justify

every purchase she makes for herself to me.

Andrew: I don't believe that morality issues regarding taking revenge against animals was an important theme in Moby-Dick. Melville was big on symbolism so most of the characters and important elements require some interpretation to fit into the fabric he's weaving. And the book was influenced by Nathaniel Hawthorne into being more allegorical. The two authors could keep a semiotician busy for quite a while.

 

Mark: I usually don't want to deliberately piss people off. Tweak their noses a bit, sure. But I apply the same practice to myself. I once read a greeting card that said "Eat a live toad first thing in the morning and nothing worse will happen the rest of the day." I try to live by that code.

 

Bill: Yup. Not in my backyard, or bathroom for that matter. I'm a big believer in the territorial imperative.

 

BTW, early one morning while in Chicago on business I saw a fox dash across a heavily travelled road in Des Plaines. Most of these critters are stubborn survivors. Of all the concerns and potentially negative impacts in their lives I'm fairly certain artificial calls aren't too high on the list.

If left alone the over population problems sort themselves out but it seems we must interfere and then intefere again. There are a number of species that delay/prolong gestation if the environment is too hostile. Not such dumb animals after all.

 

Lex - in the UK there are more foxes in the urban areas than in the country. They are amongst the great survivors and I have great affection for the little red rascals - even in my backyard.

I just had to chime in. One or two calls may not stress out an animal, however, it is

cumilative. What did the last person do that this animal came across. just like feeding a

squirrel. Once may not harm it but if every tourist fed it crackers and cookies it would die

of junk food.

 

My wife is never worried when I photograph bears, she is confident I know how close is

close enough, but she is scared to death that the last photog threw a rock or harrassed it

silly and it will think I am him/her.

 

As far as moose, Alex, get out of the car and do some hiking, You can get very close to

moose without danger if you know how. and without stressing them out. The problem i

see is that most 'wildlife photographers' don't know the first thng about wildlife or

wilderness, how to act or behave. I think calls can be just as bad as baiting or throwing

rocks in some cases. Just don't do it. Use good field techniques and your images will be

better than most.

wow....I wish people had this much passion about their FAMILIES and the poor and starving in AMERICA! Too much (for the non-USA posters) Politically Correctness (PC) here if you ask me. As stated in many posts, if you arent trying to kill them or disturb them, they are wild animals. If you look at my portfolio, these are all taken within 1 mile of my house in the center of a suburban area - geese, deer, coyotes, Herons, fox are lving among us - we do more to disturb them with constant development/building in their habitats but they seem to be adapting. I am getting worried about the Black Bears who are showing up more and more in the towns in Suburban Hartford CT though!

I havent used calls (yet) in my photography.

Mark - I am sure the posters here do care as much about their families and the poor and starving but there is one significant difference - animals, like children, cannot speak up for themselves and need someone to do it for them.

 

PC is probably just as prevalent here in the UK and it achieves little of benefit in my view.

Jim, do you suppose that repeated calling of animals has the same cumulative effect as wolf whistling at women does? Perhaps a gradual erosion of self-confidence or similar detrimental psychological effects? Perhaps there's meat here for a government funded study to determine the effects of calls on animals.

 

I jest. A bit.

Lex, If one wolf whistles at girls long enough he is sure to get slapped...or get lucky.

hmmm...

 

call with caution and hope?

At the risk of prolonging this debate, I'm wondering how folks would compare the ethics of using calls to attract wildlife for photography with catch and release fishing?

 

I think it's a fair generalization to say that many of us believe that we have a right to use, but not abuse, our natural resources.

 

However I've observed that there is a rather small but very vocal minority who believe that we have no right to "exploit" the Earth. Our differences in definitions of "exploitation" make it difficult to find common ground. Common watchwords of these types of photographers include "Take nothing but photographs. Leave nothing but footprints." This fey disposition may seem cute when signing gift copies of "Harry Potter" books to young ones, but it's hardly any different from the military sniper's code of "One shot, one kill."

 

I have an inherent disagreement with the concept of low- or no-impact living. It implies that humans are an aberration. I've heard some of the most extreme adherents to the no-impact lifestyle compare humans to viruses, as tho' we should be eradicated before we infect all of Gaia.

 

Of course, maybe I'm just grumpy because I haven't had enough coffee this morning. I believe that a significant number of photographers, particularly nature photographers, have been hunters (many still are) and have simply modified our approach to stalking, hunting and the "kill", or photograph. I'm not in the mood to be disenfranchised from yet another enjoyable pursuit by those who attempt to co-opt it through narrowmindedness and intolerance.

 

Now pardon me while I tread heavily down the driveway to fetch my tripod, after which I will plop my butt on the defenseless grass and disturb the peace with the clattering of my camera's motor drive. Shame on me.

Yes, I'm appalled, Lex. The shutter noise alone is enough to wake the forest.

 

And I had to give up fishing too -- Mama told me to stop playin' with my food.

After a few days we start to change original subject but I hope it is OK as nobody write anything new.

 

Lex, again I take no side if somebody catch fish for meal. They say fish meat is good for you. But I do not like to eat them. After trying to fry a few in the past my whole place was stinking and the thing tasted like ..... Well, like fish.

 

Catching and releasing is a total different story. I feel that you asked that predicting some mines to go off here :). I just put it very simple this is just unnecessary torture of fish done by some bored person having nothing better to do. If one cannot read books one can go outside and observe nature. One will learn much more from that than from sitting few hours watching line.

 

Both fish men and hunters should learn ethics as well. I have seen many birds caught and die in fishing lines left behind by stupid people.

 

You are lucky, here is wall of rain all day long no much to do outside today.

Interesting. locally, "catch & release" is considered the higher ethic. Preservation of the local population & all. Never saw much sense in it though - I like fish. To eat, that is.

This thread really is running.

 

Fishing - my father always described it as " a little worm at one end and a big worm at the other" - put me off fishing for life. I believe that most fishermen do it to get away from wife/life/strife.

 

Seriously though I went deep sea fishing once - caught some yellow fin tunny which looked wonderful but after half-an-hour in the gunnels just looked dead and lifeless. Even given the food value I decided it was not for me - but then I eat fish most of which is not yet bred and farmed as a food product. But again we have over-fishing problems and endangered species - it really is a minefield.

 

Sorry Mark but summer has at last arrived in the UK - not a cloud in the sky - the camera is ready to roll !

Geez, I don't check back for a few days and you guys are off fishing now. Where's my pole...there's swarms of perch that have invaded our lake and I could use a few for supper. Guess I'll go out at dawn, if there's nothing photographic to be caught maybe I can lure soemthing edible.

Hi Alex Kumar,

I am not sure I am gettign the right person.

Anyhow my name is Arurlaj Jayaraj.

I am friend of ChinnaThambi.

Well he has asked to get in touch with you as your parents wants you to call them.

Please get in touch with them ASAP.

or

mail me arulrajj@yahoo.com

 

Thx,

Arul

If you can not sit and wait to get that foto then start fotographing something else thats easy to catch like buildings:

First, I am a Newbie to this blog and want to thank you all for allowing me to join.

 

Wow, this is an interesting thread and having used a predator call over 30 years ago, calling Fox, Coyotes, Bobcats, Wolves, and Deer; I quit using a call when I picked up the camera. By the way, Predators actually get used to the sound of a call real quick and more specifically, to individual calls; and these call-wary Predators will refuse to come in and even ignore the call.

 

I do not believe it is ethical for a "photographer" to use a call to coax animals in for a close pic or even so the animal shows itself. I get a ton of satisfaction from getting my pic and departing without alarming the animal. There seems to be both sides to the argument and I look at it like religion and politics, there will be different opinions. I guess I just don't believe it is sporting or right to use calls to lure animals in for a photo, but then I don't bait or take pics of birds at a feeder either That's just me and I respect other's thoughts and feelings as well.

(The young Doe pic was feeding by the road and had raised her head to see what was there; I was behind the other vehicle and quietly shot a number of pics with a 150 - 600mm from a window beanbag, and eased away as she returned to her meal).

I don't think it's any worse than using bait or any other kind of attractant UNDER PROPER CIRCUMSTANCES.

 

This is a hotly debated topic (LINK)

 

My personal feeling is that it is intrusive and can have negative effects in too many ways to do it.

That, by the way is the case with domestic bird feeders as well.

 

My neighbor has a constantly stocked feeder.

I have a plump hawk living in my backyard next door