[Ashley beolens]

I have a few questions for the more experienced photograpers/digiscopers out there to do with the licence needed for photographing breeding birds:

1) Does it apply to all birds or only rare birds, i.e can I photograph blackbird on or near a nest with out one?

2) What birds are classed as schedule 1 (a site with a list would help)?

3) How do you get a licence?

I am asking not as I rally intend to disturb breeding birds but purely asI am interested in photograping Swallows and Martins, and I am rubbish at flying objects, so birds on or near a nest would be easiest, but I do not want to break any laws.

Thanks in advance.

[dylan]

I think this is what you're looking for Ashley:

http://www.english-nature.org.uk/sci....asp#schedule1

I checked it out last year as I was hoping to photograph Kingfishers... but they are protected and I never got it together to apply.

Good luck,

Dylan.

[jpoyner]

Though I don't think it's specifically illegal to photograph non-schedule one species at the nest I think great care should still be taken.
Your presence is advertising the nest to predators and without doubt disturbing and distressing the adult birds.
Is this absolutely necessary and really wise for the sake of a photo is the question you must ask yourself???
I think that photographing any bird at the nest should be avoided if at all possible.

JP

[Grousemore]

Originally Posted by jpoyner

Though I don't think it's specifically illegal to photograph non-schedule one species at the nest I think great care should still be taken.
Your presence is advertising the nest to predators and without doubt disturbing and distressing the adult birds.
Is this absolutely necessary and really wise for the sake of a photo is the question you must ask yourself???
I think that photographing any bird at the nest should be avoided if at all possible.

JP

I agree entirely,JP,I think you've summed it up admirably.

[alcedo.atthis]

[quote=Ashley beolens]I have a few questions for the more experienced photograpers/digiscopers out there to do with the licence needed for photographing breeding birds:

1) Does it apply to all birds or only rare birds, i.e can I photograph blackbird on or near a nest with out one?

2) What birds are classed as schedule 1 (a site with a list would help)?

3) How do you get a licence?

I am asking not as I rally intend to disturb breeding birds but purely asI am interested in photograping Swallows and Martins, and I am rubbish at flying objects, so birds on or near a nest would be easiest, but I do not want to break any laws.

Thanks in advance.

Ashley, tread carefully. The Birds Directive comes into force in 2004 in the U.K.

Article 1

1. This Directive relates to the conservation of all species of naturally occurring birds in the wild state in the European territory of the Member States to which the Treaty applies. It covers the protection, management and control of these species and lays down rules for their exploitation.
2. It shall apply to birds, their eggs, nests and habitats.
3. This Directive shall not apply to Greenland.

Article 5 Without prejudice to Articles 7 and 9, Member States shall take the requisite measures to establish a general system of protection for all species of birds referred to in Article 1, prohibiting in particular:

1. deliberate killing or capture by any method;
2. deliberate destruction of, or damage to, their nests and eggs or removal of their nests;
3. taking their eggs in the wild and keeping these eggs even if empty;
4. deliberate disturbance of these birds particularly during the period of breeding and rearing, in so far as disturbance would be significant having regard to the objectives of this Directive;
5. keeping birds of species the hunting and capture of which is prohibited.

The whole directive can be found at http://www.ecnc.nl/doc/europe/legislat/birdsdir.html

Regards

Malky.

[alcedo.atthis]

As for an answer to question 3,

Photographers cannot visit such nests unless they obtain the

appropriate licence from the relevant authority. These are as

follows:

English Nature

Northminster House, Peterborough PE1 1UA.

Tel: 01733 340345

Countryside Council for Wales

Plas Penrhos, Fford Penrhos, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2LQ. Tel:

01248 370444

Scottish Natural Heritage

Research and Advisory Service, Bonnington Bond, 2/5

Anderson Place, Edinburgh EH6 5NP. Tel 0131 554 9797

Malky.

[jpoyner]

Seems quite clear then once this law comes into being....basically it's a big no no.

JP

[Michael Frankis]

I don't see anything in the directive snippets above about photography - only disturbance, which is a separate issue. A good photographer doesn't disturb the birds he's photographing; the more so with modern digiscoping setups where you can get (as far as I know) decent pics of a Firecrest's supercilium from half a mile away. Conversely, birding, without a camera, has the potential just as easily to disturb birds as taking photos does.

At the moment, a blanket law prohibiting photography of schedule 1 birds leads to some silly anomalies, e.g., that it is (at least technically) illegal to take a photo looking out of a hide at Minsmere or Titchwell, as there's sure to be an Avocet nest somewhere in view. Even though doing so doesn't disturb the birds at all.

I reckon if the law concentrates on disturbance, rather than pointing cameras, that will be a good thing.

Michael

[Neil]

The traditional photographer was setting up his equipment (tripods,stool,blind and flashes in most cases) at less than 20ft from the nest (I've seen some as close as 6ft) and sits there for hours in some cases. At this distance the flashes and clicking must be disturbing to anxious parents. They also leave evidence of their presence (eg smell) that predators pick up on. I have seen a kingfisher not take food into a nest when I was 50 ft away. I moved back to 60ft and that seemed ok. Digiscoping enables us to set up at a respectable distance but I normally only take nest photos of common birds that have nests in public areas (parks and picnic areas ) and so are used to people being around, and even then I wait for the young to be close to fledging.

[Ashley beolens]

Thank you all.

From what I can gather, from the english nature website (cheers Dylan) to gain a licence for Schedule 1 bird photography you already need to have pics of common birds on the nest, so it looks like it is OK to photograph my swallows!

I very much doubt my presence will affect them as they dwell in town houses, and are very used to people being near. Of course I will still be very careful not to disturb them.

A very interesting thing I have discovered whilst searching this out, is that the licence is actually to allow you TO disturb the birds, which seems crazy to me, as it is perfectly possible to get photos of a nest with out causing disturbance, or getting too close. I would have thought that the licence should make it clear you were not to disturb the birds.

[CJW]

Originally Posted by Michael Frankis

I reckon if the law concentrates on disturbance, rather than pointing cameras, that will be a good thing.

Michael

You couldn't be more wrong Michael. Even ignoring the very silly exaggeration re: Firecrest's supercillia/digiscoping.
The fact the someone is deliberately going out of their way to photograph a bird at it's nest, means they are potentially disturbing it.
And we mustn't forget that, even were the photographer a responsible individual, the subsequent display/publication of any shots taken would inevitably lead to less responsible people being encouraged to attempt the same.

[alan_rymer]

Originally Posted by CJW

You couldn't be more wrong Michael. Even ignoring the very silly exaggeration re: Firecrest's supercillia/digiscoping.
The fact the someone is deliberately going out of their way to photograph a bird at it's nest, means they are potentially disturbing it.
And we mustn't forget that, even were the photographer a responsible individual, the subsequent display/publication of any shots taken would inevitably lead to less responsible people being encouraged to attempt the same.

I would prefer that you did not use the word potential as anything has the potential to disturb a nesting bird, even traffic on a road half a mile away!.
I watched a Great Crested Grebe nest being destroyed this morning, by fish spawning against it!. In this case by Carp, some weighing over 30lb. Should the fishing club who stocked the Carp have known this was "potentially" possible?.
I know it sounds and probably is pedantic.
Currently then, its O.K. to disturb them if you have a licence, and to get a licence you have to have already disturbed (photographed) more common birds!.
I agree with Micheal, disturbance of the breeding birds should be banned!.

[alcedo.atthis]

When the changes come in, the definition of "wild bird" as far as the revamped Wildlife and Countryside Act, 2004 amendments, is concerned will be :- "wild bird" means any bird of a species which is ordinarily resident or is a visitor to the European territory of any member state in a wild state but does not include poultry or, except in sections 5 and 16, any game bird.
This being noted to include all wild birds of any member state, transient, passage migrants or residents, the implications are far reaching, and depending on interpretation of the "Act" and sections within, some birdwatching habits may have to be seriously curtailed.
Will there be a requirement for the Schedule 1 status, or will all birds be afforded the same protection status, alleviating discrimination between species.
We will have to wait and see.

Malky.

[CJW]

Originally Posted by alan_rymer

I would prefer that you did not use the word potential as anything has the potential to disturb a nesting bird, even traffic on a road half a mile away!.
I agree with Micheal, disturbance of the breeding birds should be banned!.

Oh well if you prefer it then. Who died and put you in charge of how I phrase my posts?

Originally Posted by alan_rymer

disturbance of the breeding birds should be banned!

Good grief, stick to Ruffled Feathers Alan.

[peteh]

ahhh good old EU.
Rule one : noone in the Uk is allowed to look at any bird near its nest even if it is nesting in your porch.
Rule two : Ignore Malta blowing all the migrants to bits.
grrrrrrrr
Dont get me started.

[alan_rymer]

Originally Posted by CJW

Oh well if you prefer it then. Who died and put you in charge of how I phrase my posts?





Good grief, stick to Ruffled Feathers Alan.

I apologise for having an opinion!.

[Steve G]

There is some confusion pertaining to photography of Schedule 1 species at the nest. Contrary to what some may think it is not illegal to photograph Schedule 1 birds at the nest but it is illegal to disturb these birds at the nest for the purpose of photography(or for other reasons) without a licence. Licenses are issued by SNH in Scotland & English Nature in England & Wales. Here is a link to an English Nature pdf file of the application form for a Schedule 1 licence: http://www.english-nature.org.uk/sci...ion_form_3.pdf
-note the wording on this form regarding disturbance. Thus the excellent pictures of Peregrine with young (a Schedule 1 species) at the nest at the Falls of Clyde reserve currently showing on the members gallery were not obtained illegally as the birds were not disturbed by the photographer. Similarly the many thousands of nest-snapping visitors to the Loch Garten Osprey eyrie are safe from the clutches of the Highland Region Polis!
The golden rule in bird photography is that THE BIRDS' WELFARE MUST ALWAYS COME FIRST & FOREMOST. The spirit of this statement should apply to common species as well as rarities & in fact firm allegiance to this doctrine will be much more restricting than the current or new EU legislation. If you cannot take a picture safely without disturbing a nesting bird then don't take the picture. The definition of disturbance should not be confined to direct disturbance of the bird by the photographer but should also extend to other potential repercussions such as the photographer's activities alerting others of malign intent to the whereabouts of nesting birds.
Having said all that photographing birds is an enjoyable pastime & should be encouraged. As long as the bird's welfare remains uppermost in your mind & common sense prevails you will not fall foul of the law.

[CJW]

Originally Posted by Steve G

Thus the excellent pictures of Peregrine with young (a Schedule 1 species) at the nest at the Falls of Clyde reserve currently showing on the members gallery were not obtained illegally as the birds were not disturbed by the photographer.

And yet they didn't fall within our Gallery Guidelines. So they've been deleted.

[Steve G]

Originally Posted by CJW

And yet they didn't fall within our Gallery Guidelines. So they've been deleted.

Oh dear, how did they fall foul of the gallery guidelines?

[Steve G]

The Falls of Clyde reserve has a wardened Peregrine eyrie with a visitors viewpoint. Members of the public can view or photograph the birds under supervision in a manner akin to the Osprey visitors centres. The Falls of Clyde scheme has been running for a few years now & has raised public awareness of the plight of Peregrines. Views of the eyrie are excellent & the site is one of great natural beauty. These Peregrines have a good track record in rearing youngsters & have been excellent ambassadors to the Bird of Prey cause in Scotland. The Falls of Clyde is a Scottish Wildlife Trust reserve which is accessed from New Lanark -itself a place well worth a visit.

[Andy Bright]

The shot was removed due to the equipment stated with the photo... a 300mm lens + 1.4x tc. We can't really guess as to the cropping with the shot, but this isn't really the equipment we'd encourage for this type of nest shot.
The removal of these photos, and similar ones, is not so much to do with any actual disturbance, as there probably wasn't in this case, but more about disuading others from emulating with inadequate equipment.
It appears one shot was with an 800mm lens and we have left that in the gallery.

[Steve G]

It was amiss of me not to include a link to the SWT homepage from where the Peregrine watch details can be obtained. The viewpoint is on one side of a gorge at eye level to the nesting Peregrines on the other side & close enough to produce "large" images with super-telephoto lenses. The staff are more than happy to help you get a good picture but unfortunately they won't carry your gear up there for you!
SWT: www.swt.org.uk/default.asp

[Michael Frankis]

Originally Posted by Steve G

There is some confusion pertaining to photography of Schedule 1 species at the nest .....

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the clarification!

Michael

[cspratt]

Originally Posted by Andy Bright

The shot was removed due to the equipment stated with the photo... a 300mm lens + 1.4x tc. We can't really guess as to the cropping with the shot, but this isn't really the equipment we'd encourage for this type of nest shot.
The removal of these photos, and similar ones, is not so much to do with any actual disturbance, as there probably wasn't in this case, but more about disuading others from emulating with inadequate equipment.
It appears one shot was with an 800mm lens and we have left that in the gallery.

Your above quoted message "emulating with inadequate equipment". Please define "inadequate". How large a telephoto lens must be used to land into "adequate" equipment?

[Andy Bright]

Originally Posted by cspratt

Your above quoted message "emulating with inadequate equipment". Please define "inadequate". How large a telephoto lens must be used to land into "adequate" equipment?

Well this will vary according to the size of bird, and as i said... who know's how much cropping has been done? Basically most digiscoped shots will indicate a fair distance and 600mm+ focal length for dslr/35mm.. but we still reserve the right to delete any nest photo, no matter what the equipment. We have to judge these shots on gut feeling sometimes, the alternative is a total blanket ban on all nest shots (maybe with the exception of remote nestbox cams)

What we don't want to see is nest shots taken with a 4x zoom on a compact digicam, these will be deleted.
Remember that this site is primarily a birding one, not photography... the welfare of birds is paramount and we would rather be safe than sorry, even if our decisions seem unfair.