HKBWS Forum 香港觀鳥會討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

Subject: Discussion: baiting birds for photos　討論：餌誘拍鳥 [Print This Page]

Author: BWA Time: 30/12/2010 10:38 Subject: Discussion: baiting birds for photos　討論：餌誘拍鳥

Do you think baiting birds to take photos is consistent with the objectives of the Society?
各位認為用餌誘鳥兒來拍照合乎本會宗旨嗎？

Below is an article from Ming Pao Daily by well-known news commentator Sam Ng, reporting on the mis-behaviour (making noises, smoking, and baiting birds) of photographers at Long Valley.

吳志森隔日見報samngx123@gmail.com
明報 D05 | 副刊時代 | 三言堂 | By 吳志森 2010-12-20

餌誘拍鳥

得悉淡水濕地塱原的鳥種，近年增加兩成，不少早已絕跡的，又再親臨舊地，為了一睹
牠們的風采，周末，拿起相機，直奔塱原。

早說過，塱原不是一個驚為天人的觀鳥地點，沒有足夠的耐性和細心，跟你捉迷藏的鳥
兒，不會輕易讓你發現。一如以往，選了一個注了水的濕田，耐心等著飛走又回來的涉
禽，拍下水中美妙的姿態，都是些林鷸、黑翅長腳鷸、扇尾沙錐，不算甚麼稀有品種，
看著牠們無憂無慮，自由自在，不受干擾，追逐、覓食、嬉戲，賞心悅目，甚麼煩惱都
煙消雲散。

塱原的田仍有人耕種，有種生菜，有稻田，也有只在夏天盛放秋冬已凋零的蓮花，不同
的生態，吸引著不同品種的雀鳥。假日，人們托著沉甸甸的三腳架，連著長炮鏡頭的專
業攝影機，在阡陌上走來走去，捕捉他們心中的美態和美景。

抬頭望去，一幫攝友聚在遠處田間，十多支長炮鏡頭，對準近距離的灌木林，聚精會
神，嚴陣以待。走近，原來在拍攝一隻並不常見的藍喉歌鴝。鳥兒現身，此起彼落的快
門聲響起，像在迎接一個久未露面的國際巨星。

只見這隻胸口有一撮藍色羽毛精靈可愛的鳥兒，一蹦一跳的從草叢出來，昂首闊步，然
後知情識趣的跳上枝頭，擺出各種姿勢，滿足一眾拍友的要求。

鳥兒一擺尾，消失在草叢中，緊張的拍攝告一段落。拍友都鬆懈下來，交頭接耳，檢閱
自己的戰利品，對別人的作品評頭品足。交談的聲浪愈來愈大，有人更抽起煙來。我好
生奇怪，鳥兒怕人，特別敏感，聲音身影動作都會嚇走牠們，抽煙更污染空氣，統統都
犯了觀鳥的大忌，所有錯誤幾乎都做齊了。

然後，其中一位拍友，拿著一個小盒子，走到鳥兒曾經停留的樹旁，把不知名的東西放
到樹枝上。這時，我才恍然大悟，原來他們用餌引鳥，怪不得即使人聲鼎沸，那隻藍喉
歌鴝，消失了又再出現。鳥兒的各種美態，原來都是拍友們擺佈下得回來的。

他們用的是甚麼餌會否吃壞雀鳥我不知道，但觀鳥拍鳥的守則，不是應該保持大自然的
原狀，盡量對雀鳥不作任何干擾的嗎？餌誘拍鳥，即使拍到最美妙的姿態，算真實和自
然嗎？

Author: BWA Time: 30/12/2010 11:53

一個簡單測試，有沒有人敢站出來，
光明正大地表示自己曾經用誘餌拍鳥？

A simple acid test:
Would anyone stand up and say that he / she has baited birds for photos?

Author: wcaptain Time: 30/12/2010 14:52

It really depends on the objective. Like Mai Po, a lot of Tilapia are dumped into #4 for feeding cormorants and some photographers went there to take photos without causing troubles. So, with this regard, I don't think there is any problem BUT it should not be quoted to support the photo-oriented feeding.

In the UK, it is known that some top wildlife photographers used baited to take good photos, like provision of a tank of small fish for Common Kingfishers and this photographer took photos from the bottom of the tank. It is very hard to say the bird will suffer from this. It looks likely a little bit of "援交".

Provision of a tank of fish or a bucket of worms does not really have detrimental effect on birds. But it may change the behaviour of a bird individual, making it more tame to potential predators like us.

In HK, we have a dense population of both people and birds. Every single action toward birds must be carefully planned. As food is plenty and winter weather is wild, so there is no justification to provide food to birds for simply taking photos. It should be back up with conservation objectives. Go to drained down ponds, harvested vegetable field or fruiting trees to take photos. Anyway, such provision of food for photo-taking is not necessary and fully justified in HK.

[ Last edited by wcaptain at 30/12/2010 14:53 ]

Author: TBM Time: 30/12/2010 15:03

相信 BBC ,國家地理,一些生態拍攝片段,亦會運用"餌誘"這一方式,去完成拍攝.

[ Last edited by TBM at 30/12/2010 15:46 ]

Author: brendank Time: 30/12/2010 15:11

In North America millions of people have bird feeding stations which could be considered a type of baiting.

I think there could be some chance of introducing diseases from exotic food sources but other than that I don't see too much harm.

Author: wcaptain Time: 30/12/2010 15:36

In some countries in the North Hemisphere, feeding birds in winter is encourage.

Canada
http://www.spca.bc.ca/news-and-e ... need-a-helping.html

UK
http://www.rspb.org.uk/advice/helpingbirds/feeding/

In HK, such feeding (for photo-taking and save young birds) is not necessary as food is plenty and winter weather is mild.

Author: cjacky Time: 30/12/2010 16:21

本人就覺得唔放"餌誘"比較好。
有人見到WORK，就會模仿別人餌誘，再而產生變種既餌誘方法。

以往有人為要虎班地鶫停留久一點，增加拍攝時間，用牙籤穿住條蚯蚓。
有人用夾具，釣高條蟲，影伯勞飛起食蟲既一刻。
亦有人於公園放紅劍魚影小翠。
相信呢D 都唔係值得選讚揚既行為。

[ Last edited by cjacky at 31/12/2010 00:58 ]

Author: Beetle Time: 30/12/2010 16:30

I think there is a fundamental different between feeding and baiting.

Feeding is for the good of the birds, while there maybe other activities such as watching and photographing as an added benefit to the feeder.
Baiting, is primarily for photographing - it may or may not do harm to the bird.

I wonder whether migratory birds have different nutritional needs in different time, so if you feed it with something it don't normally eat during the time of the year, maybe it would be affected. Just my speculation and i would leave it to experts.

I am not saying baiting is wrong, however for the sake of nature appreciation i would not encourage baiting to get satisfying photos.

Author: EricB Time: 30/12/2010 18:11

Would some one be kind enough to translate the original Chinese text?
Many thanks,
eric

Author: mguy Time: 30/12/2010 18:37

(responding without understanding the original text… but here goes)

Hmmmm...... do I need to put my hand up to baiting? …. YES.

But at what point is baiting, baiting…… and acceptable or not.

The fish are put into #4 pond to feed Cormorants..... a lot of other birds feed & a lot of photographers take advantage.
Do the Cormorants see an association between humans & food? Perhaps.
Is there a greater or lesser benefit to those Cormorants simply because it is done at Mai Po, or could it or something similar be done by an individual or association located anywhere in Hong Kong?
Are the photographers associated with that food? If so......., the photographers would probably have Cormorants sitting on the bus or taxi roof when they go home, or alternatively the Cormorants would be sitting outside the Mai Po warders house every feeding day morning.

UK was highlighted because some top photographers bait birds with various foods dependent on the bird they want to attract.
UK is not alone..... it is practiced worldwide and to much greater degrees than might be practiced in Hong Kong!! And to varying degrees from seed to white mice.
In many countries they have birding ranches set up specifically to attract birds to bait so the waiting photographers can catch the action (raptors & mice & 50 photographers in a line), for monetary gain.

Is there an association between food & humans? Is really dependent on the action of the human, & do they encourage the association between food & humans.
I don't think most photographers encourage a bird/human relationship.... as their art/skill is in the photograph, not showing people how easy it is to handfeed a Cormorant & get everybody else doing it. Once they have the photograph they want, most just move on to the next subject.

A second issue.... there is a variable country issue with regard to predation of birds by humans & whether it would be detrimental to the safety of the bird to see an association between humans & birds.
In a lot of countries most birds are protected and as such capture & sale is not encouraged.
This does not mean that people do not bait & capture birds for monetary advantage in Hong Kong... we all know this happens.... but these are not photographers or birders. Although the baiting by photographers or birders may make the work easier for trappers in isolated cases…, the catchers are very experienced and know what they are doing. They don’t need or encourage outsiders to assist them in their clandestine activities.

A third issue.... the baiting of birds is not necessarily dependent on the ready supply of food... it can also be the creation of a favourable "bird" environment where one did not exist before.... or the maintenance of an ideal "bird" environment to attract birds.... or phishing... or imitation of bird calls etc.

To my own situation which may or may not be being questioned by some.....

4 years ago I rented a house with a 5,000 square foot garden on a north facing hillside on Lamma Island.... in the knowledge it would/could be a good birding site & specifically to photograph birds. The house is relatively isolated on the hill.

I then built a series of 4 connecting ponds 50’ in length.... for decoration & in the knowledge it would attract, bugs, frogs, snakes, birds etc...... and create an environment beneficial to wild/birdlife that did not exist before….., and in the knowledge that there is no year round flowing/fresh water within about half km and animal life would be “unnaturally” attracted to my garden.
Does this action become "baiting"... I think so.

I then built a hide which is 10' x 8' x 6' at the minimum focus distance for my 500m lens from where I expected the birds to come to water.... more intention of creation of an environment for the purpose of bird photography.
I then created an environment around the pond whereby various different birds could approach the pond to drink & bathe with relative security & comfort…… the baiting intention continues.

Is there an association between me & baiting & the birds... I sometimes wish there was... it would make my life a lot easier...... I only have to move my lens sticking from the front of the hide 1cm & the male Japanese Thrush will disappear. Other birds are similarly nervous to varying degrees.
The only way I can effectively photograph the Japanese Thrush, is to study its actions, and then anticipate when & where it will appear in front of my waiting lens. In reality I could do this anywhere, it does not need to be in my garden.
The birds are very anxious from the sound of the camera shutter, but I have minimised this by creating a noisy waterfall & by fixing a 2” thick polystyrene noise buffer to my lens.

When I sit outside my house... most birds fly immediately... the exceptions..... bulbuls & a Blue Whistling Thrush... do these birds see an association between me and the pond & the provision of water.... I don't think so.
The birds never see me when I am photographing & I never use flash which causes birds extreme initial anxiety ….. most bird photographers use flash!! Although birds can become acclimatised to “flash”.
Do the birds ever see me enter the hide?.... never... it has a back entrance & most times I climb out the kitchen window to avoid leaving from the front and then round the back of the house to enter the hide.
Have I always been so considerate…. No…. but like many things in life, there is a learning curve with regard to understanding and appreciation of alter values.

Do the birds see me near the pond… yes often… making changes, putting up different perches, moving rocks…… do they see me as creating a nice environment for them…. I don’t think so… in birdworld they probably think I am going there to drink & bathe my feet and am just very clumsy with branches & rocks around me.

I don't use bird calls & I don't "phish".
I do put food out..., but 30 yards from the pond area as I don't want dominant birds like the Magpie Robin or Blue Whistling Thrush to keep bathers away and inhibiting their water oriented habits which are already anxiety filled .... and most days I put the food out at 05:00......, not so the birds don't associate me with food, but because I don't want to disturb any bird activity that might be happening naturally around my pond "shooting" area.

So why do I put out food? Is simple.... to attract more birds to the vacinity of the pond, but not to the pond, because I like to see and watch birds and their behaviour patterns in the garden.... although is probably not necessary as I leave my pond waterfall running 24 hours a day using the noise to attract birds from a greater distance, especially at night.
Do the birds see an association between me & food... perhaps.... but is not intentional and definitely not as much as the Lamma ferry & Little Egrets, or Crows & rubbish bins etc.... each having a human association.
The Little Egrets start flying in readiness to the ferry when the closing bell goes off before the ferry departs!!!

Do I feel the association of humans & food is actually a big issue in Hong Kong through predation by humans .... not really.... I think the greater issue may be the congregation of a large number of birds & different species in a confined area & the possible spread of disease.
However, does the unnatural creation of a preferential environment cause a congregation or an association that would not occur naturally to a greater or lesser extent elsewhere and cause a similar spread of disease?
If my pond did not exist, would the birds not look for an alternate water supply, or would it stop their continued migration… there are variable answers to each question.

My intention for this lengthy reply…. not necessarily to defend my action of having a preferential environment or ‘baiting” for the purpose of photographing birds, but..

Firstly to highlight that in all situations there are variables to any question…. and the issue of baiting & not baiting can be similarly questioned with the feeding of Cormorants at Mai Po or the creation of an artificial water source on Lamma Island………., by the creation of an environment that would be appreciated by travel weary & hungry birds,

Secondly…., I have seen this issue raised many times in various forums and never responded, mainly because the responses I read have always been too simplistic & based solely on whether or not a person is a birder or a bird photographer.
There are differences of opinion, however I have noticed a greater desire in HKBWS for birders and bird photographers to accommodate one another to their mutual benefit and I felt I should give a view as I appreciate the work done by the HKBWS and whether my views are admonished or greeted then HKBWS members deserve some input from me.

Thirdly…, but correct me if I am wrong…. One mutual benefit from my pond… more birders are beginning to give Lamma Island a greater priority and they in turn, or the powers that be, may also gradually have an understanding that bird environments are gradually being decimated on Lamma to facilitate “economic progress”…… and protectionists and the like should give Lamma more thought.
Lamma Island is too often considered an uninteresting faraway backwater.

All the best, Guy (A bird photographer who may gradually be turning into a birder)
Ps.. if anybody is interested… between 07:00-09:30 yesterday I had 34 thrush visits to the pond….. during the course of the whole of today I think I had between 50-70 thrush visits to the pond area….. none of the birds saw me or a relationship between me & my baiting action nor do I believe were they adversely affected.

Author: ctakming Time: 30/12/2010 18:42

As far as I know, feeding of any wild animals is prohibited at Lion Rock Country Park, Kam Shan Country Park, Shing Mun Country Park and Tai Po Kau Nature Reserve, the area comprising that part of Tai Mo Shan Country Park which adjoins Shing Mun Country Park and Tai Po Kau Nature Reserve, the area to the northeast of Kowloon Reservoir, the area to the south of Kowloon Byewash Reservoir, the area to the south of Shing Mun Country Park, the area to the northeast of Tai Po Kau Nature Reserve known as Tsung Tsai Yuen and two areas which do not form part of but are completely enclosed by Tai Po Kau Nature Reserve according to the WILD ANIMALS PROTECTION ORDINANCE.

Author: Beetle Time: 30/12/2010 19:47

I would like to try to translate the original article as per Eric's request.
I try to translate in the exact same meaning so the wordings might not be as nice as the original.
Please comment if you found something i didn't translate well.

===================================================================================================================
Baiting for photographing birds

I've recently learned that number of bird species found in Long Valley Wetlands has increased by 20%, while some species re-appeared at the site. Thus i went to Long Valley in the weekend with my camera and appreciate the birds there.

As I've said long time ago that Long Valley is not such a astonishing place for bird watching, because the birds there are always hiding from you. You wouldn't be able to see them unless you pay enough patient and attention. I have chosen a wet field full of water to wait for waders coming and flying away, photographing the beauty of them. Although they are common species like Wood Sandpipers, Black-winged Stilts and Common Snipes, I enjoyed watching them foraging, playing, running around... free from disturbances and I forgot all my worries in my head.

There are still acitive farming in Long Valley such as lettuce and rice farming, as well as lotus that blossoms in summer and withered away in autumn-winter. The different habitats attracts a variety of birds. On holidays, people hold their heavy tripods, long lens on professional cameras and walk to and fro on the fields, taking photographs of the landscape and beauty (of birds and wildlife) that look beautiful to them.

I found a group of photographers some distance away from me, pointing their lenses towards a patch of bush, paying extreme attention and prepared for photographs. There was a Bluethroat, an uncommon bird. When it appeared there were a bunch of shutter sounds from the cameras, just like welcoming an international star who hasn't appear for a long time.

I saw this little cute bird, with a bunch of blue feathers on its breast, coming from the bush and jump on a tree branch, satisfying photographers' needs by giving different poses.

The bird soon disappered in the bush, ending the intense photographing. The photographers relaxed, reviewed their photos and discussed with others. Their discussions gradually became loud and some people even started to smoke. These are the worst things to do in bird-watching because birds are sensitive to movements and noise, while smoking is causing air pollution around.

And then a photographer stood up, taking a little box towards the tree branch where the bird stood, and put some unknown things on that branch. I now understood why the bluethroat came back again despite the loud noise - people were baiting it. The beauty of the bird were all made by the photographers.

I don't know what bait they use and whether the bait would make birds sick. The rules of bird-watching is to maintain the nature as it was and do not interfere with the birds, shouldn't it? Baiting for photographing birds would allow the most beautiful photos to be taken, but are those photos real and natural?

===================================================================================================================

[ Last edited by Beetle at 30/12/2010 20:25 ]

Author: BWA Time: 30/12/2010 20:31

I respect people who respect the welfare of the birds. Feeding with good intentions may not be bad at all. However, feeding birds just for photos is not an honorable but a self-seeking act.

我尊重關心鳥兒利益的朋友，有時出於善心餵鳥並非壞事。
不過，單單為拍照而餵鳥就不見得光彩，反而是自私的行為。

Author: Beetle Time: 30/12/2010 22:40

To Guy,

I Think you are already a birder because you were observing birds behaviour and thought about them when you are photographing.
some photographers lack these and taking a well-done photograph is the only thing in their mind, all the time.

[ Last edited by Beetle at 31/12/2010 09:32 ]

Author: ying Time: 31/12/2010 00:15

Quote:

Original posted by BWA at 30/12/2010 20:31
I respect people who respect the welfare of the birds. Feeding with good intentions may not be bad at all. However, feeding birds just for photos is not an honorable but a self-seeking act.

我尊重 ...

Do you think baiting birds to take photos is consistent with the objectives of the Society?
各位認為用餌誘鳥兒來拍照合乎本會宗旨嗎？

雖然個題目係討論，但係唔知講完之後會唔會又俾人話會引起爭議而刪除嘞。
餌誘鳥兒來拍照應該向來都唔乎合鳥會嘅宗旨咖喇，乜重有討論空間嘅咩？咁即係樓主覺得未必係錯事喇！
既然開咗個題目 ; 討論完喇咩？如果未 ; 點解樓主咁快就定性為不光彩又自私嘅行為呢？
樓主即係判咗呢個行為係過錯喇！咁個題目點解要叫做討論呢？咁矛盾嘅？定係樓主心底早就認定餌誘係錯嘅，咁做祇不過想有人附和你嘅想法呢？
嘅然係咁，重駛唔駛討論呢？

Author: cjacky Time: 31/12/2010 00:36

如果係正確既，一定會有人附和。

相信YING 你都唔會覺得某些朋友以下”餌誘“行為有多光彩吧。

1。為要虎班地鶫停留久一點，增加拍攝時間，用牙籤穿住條蚯蚓。
2。用夾具，釣高條蟲，影伯勞飛起食蟲既一刻。

Quote:

Original posted by ying at 31/12/2010 00:15
Do you think baiting birds to take photos is consistent with the objectives of the Society?
各位認為用餌誘鳥兒來拍照合乎本會宗旨嗎？

雖然個題目係討論，但係唔知講完之後會唔會又俾人話會引起爭議而刪除嘞。
...

Author: BWA Time: 31/12/2010 06:58

Quote:

Original posted by ying at 31/12/2010 00:15
Do you think baiting birds to take photos is consistent with the objectives of the Society?
各位認為用餌誘鳥兒來拍照合乎本會宗旨嗎？

雖然個題目係討論，但係唔知講完之後會唔會又俾人話會引起爭議而刪除嘞。
...

討論嘅目的係製造一個交流個人意見嘅機會，
從中讓大家了解其他人嘅想法，知道各人嘅取向，
同時調整自己嘅睇法。

有時雖然大家對論題心中有數，
但係講出來可以令所有人更加清楚大勢所趨，
知道多數人嘅立塲，
避免因誤會造成劣幣驅逐良幣。

討論亦可以畀持另類意見嘅人有機會解釋，
讓其他人更加明白其想法或苦衷。

未出題目之前，我不知道 mguy 在南丫島的做法，
也未如 Captain 指出，餵鳥的動機可以是正面的，
讀完他們的貼文之後，我修正了自己的看法，
發表出來讓大家參考。

我仍然認為放餌拍鳥並不光彩，
如果各位可以解釋這種做法有其可敬之處，
也請指出來，讓大家評評理。

The purpose of the discussion is to provide a forum for exchanging views,
to let us know other people’s ideas, and to adjust our own where necessary.

Although most of us already have a view about the subject,
speaking out can demonstrate where the general opinion lies,
and avoid alienating those who may not be too aware of it.

Discussion also allows those with alternative views to explain
so that others may better understand their position.

Before I started the thread, I was not aware of mguy’s work in Lamma.
Nor have I thought about feeding for conservation as pointed out by Captain.
I adjusted my view after reading their posts and share it here.

I still don’t think that baiting birds for photos is an honorable act.
Perhaps the other side may like to enlighten us on this.

Author: subbuteo Time: 31/12/2010 09:55

An interesting article from a recent New Scientist about wildlife filming at the BBC Natural history unit. I love watching wildlife documentaries but this has taken some of the shine off them. It seems baiting is required for the "best" shot.

http://www.newscientist.com/arti ... odys-faking-it.html

I too feed birds; I throw a handful of bird seed in a couple of locations in Lam Tsuen- it is mostly feeding spotted doves but has brought in Japanese Quail and Yellow-breasted Bunting. I have no issue with feeding birds but I do with the harassment of birds that are feeding!

Dylan

Author: BWA Time: 31/12/2010 11:06

很多人都做並不會為這種行為添上光彩，
用誘餌拍得的照片或紀錄片令我覺得受騙，
不知其他人會不會。

That many people are doing it will not make it more honorable.
I don't know about others - I always feel cheated when learning that a photo or documentary is taken by baiting or set-up.

[ Last edited by BWA at 31/12/2010 11:19 ]

Author: HFCheung Time: 31/12/2010 16:09

I always say all bird photographers would become birdwatchers and conservationists, and many of them do.
I can also tell you that many beginning bird watchers who are not photographers do not care about birds initially.

I believe HKBWS should not promote baiting to any birdwatchers. But I also think that HKBWS should not criticize it. As in many other issues, the distinction between feeding for conservation and feeding for photo may not exist, if the person's intention is not considered.

As a comparision, see the following issues. They may be more serious issues in terms of conservation.
I do not recommend keeping birds or animals as pet, but I will not criticize all animal keepers.
I am a bird and animal lover, but I eat seafood caught in the wild.

HF Cheung

Author: ying Time: 31/12/2010 16:55

鳳頭鵐出現於塱原當日，如果樓主身處現場，你應該會目睹那些資深鳥友為了新 tick (並不是要拍得漂亮)而不顧一切！九秒九瘋狂衝向鳳頭鵐把它們嚇倒那種慘狀！http://www.hkbws.org.hk/BBS/view ... &extra=page%3D1所以:-如果不用餌誘而用這種横衝直撞的方式去拍鳥，我情願冒上'所謂不光采又自私'這個罪名！選擇用誘餌讓大家有秩序;又安安靜靜地等侯鳥兒自己跳出來讓大家拍一些美麗的照片而不會驚嚇它們，反正直至現在為止，並無確實證據可以證明餌誘對鳥兒有實質傷害，當然不得其法者例外。(此種情況可見於拍攝藍喉歌鴝samngx123@gmail.com)。

[ Last edited by ying at 31/12/2010 17:40 ]

Author: cjacky Time: 31/12/2010 17:38

如果大家攝友／鳥友會得平常心，慢慢approach 隻雀。有著一個底線。就不用做不光彩的事了。

Quote:

Original posted by ying at 31/12/2010 16:55
鳳頭鵐出現於塱原當日，如果樓主身處現場，你應該會目睹那些資深鳥友為了新 tick (並不是要拍得漂亮)爭相走告，不顧一切！九秒九瘋狂衝向鳳頭鵐把它們嚇倒那種慘狀！所以:-如果不用餌誘而用這種横衝直撞的方式去拍鳥，我情願冒上 ...

Author: ying Time: 31/12/2010 17:45

Quote:

Original posted by cjacky at 31/12/2010 17:38
如果大家攝友／鳥友會得平常心，慢慢approach 隻雀。有著一個底線。就不用做不光彩的事了。

那麼用最新褐頭鵐做例子，知道這隻漂亮鳥兒位置的應該都是圍內資深鳥友吧，應該知道如何接近鳥兒吧，還不是一樣如此。只要是有所求，即有所慾也。

[ Last edited by ying at 31/12/2010 17:53 ]

Author: ying Time: 31/12/2010 18:06

很多人都做並不會為這種行為添上光彩，
單從這一句去看，你沒有錯，可是每一件事都應該從宏觀去看。
用誘餌拍得的照片或紀錄片令我覺得受騙，
這僅是你個人或一部份人的概念。那麼在塱原請農民種禾田，讓鵐在塱原出現，鳥會這麼做是騙了你嗎？
不知其他人會不會。
人各有志。

[ Last edited by ying at 31/12/2010 18:26 ]

Author: ying Time: 31/12/2010 18:09

Quote:

Original posted by mguy at 30/12/2010 18:37
(responding without understanding the original text… but here goes)

Hmmmm...... do I need to put my hand up to baiting? …. YES.

But at what point is baiting, baiting…… and acceptable or not.

Th ...

宏大又令人羡慕的觀/拍鳥系統！

Author: smp Time: 31/12/2010 18:27

我只是個拍友,近年才開始對觀鳥產生興趣~
我只是想問,是否每一隻珍貴的鳥到訪，我們就應用食物把他純養起來，還要他練習各種特技給大家觀看或拍照?

鳳頭鵐和褐頭鵐我也拍到了, 只是企著就拍到了, 可能是運氣, 但後者是全場的人都拍到了,在場所有朋友也可以入來分享當天經驗, 分別是這次現場所有人出乎意料的守跌序,
我拍是在第一天和第二天早上,不知ying 是否在場？我返而覺得大家是因為上一次鳳頭鵐的不快經驗而進步吧

第二天也是,只是新去的朋友不知鳥的性格,企在鳥兒找吃又最接近人的地方吧了~沒聽說有人追雀橫衝直幢

我常單獨出動,不太會分哪個是資深鳥友, 既然橫衝直幢不得要領, 影响其他人和拍攝對像, 哪麼他下次一定會做得更好, 我也曾無意踏進農地，也給其他鳥友題醒，我相信人是會進步的, 餌誘並不是唯一方法，如果經常餌誘, 我們可能不用衝幢就能經鬆拍鳥(如果人是能輕易滿足的話) , 但會失去/或影向其他朋友觀察鳥正常行為的機會, 哪是很很可惜的~

Author: ying Time: 1/01/2011 12:12

Quote:

Original posted by smp at 31/12/2010 18:27
我只是個拍友,近年才開始對觀鳥產生興趣~
我只是想問,是否每一隻珍貴的鳥到訪，我們就應用食物把他純養起來，還要他練習各種特技給大家觀看或拍照?

鳳頭鵐和褐頭鵐我也拍到了, 只是企著就拍到了, 可能是運氣, 但後者是 ...

smp 師兄，我係寫 : '如果不用餌誘而用這種横衝直撞的方式去拍鳥，我情願冒上'所謂不光采又自私'這個罪名！選擇用誘餌讓大家有秩序;又安安靜靜地等侯鳥兒自己跳出來讓大家拍一些美麗的照片而不會驚嚇它們'，跟'每一隻珍貴的鳥到訪，我們就應用食物把他馴養起來，還要它練習各種特技給大家觀看或拍照?'你這種說法，係兩回事！你這種因為打爛隻雞蛋就伸延至要人賠翻個雞場嘅思維，相當之要不得！
褐頭鵐現場是有兩位人仕義務維持秩序的。鳳頭鵐和褐頭鵐你也拍到了, 只是企著就拍到了, 可能是運氣....運氣？非也！容易得過師兄當日只要 set 好套器材，站在靚位，一隻還在餵哺階段的貓頭鷹幼鳥不知為何會在草地上淒厲呼叫地讓師兄兩口子拍攝呢？重用 DC 拍呢！(此雛不是錦田樹屋的班頭)
套用 cjacky 兄的簽名 '人在做，天在看。若要人不知除非己莫為! '

[ Last edited by ying at 1/01/2011 12:18 ]

Author: smp Time: 1/01/2011 14:14

1. 對不起~你所說的~~我大至理解為"如果選擇用誘餌可以讓大家大更有秩序"有誤解到各下意思嗎?

2. 我不明白什麼是雞蛋雞場? 是不是各下應為有對某些持別情怳才需要用餌誘呢? 比如有人不守秩序時? 我不應該想得太極端? 因我應為特別鳥種會比較容易出現不守秩序的情况~

3. 首先~現在是餌誘拍鳥的討論

你所說的是這次拍攝嗎? 需然不是用餌誘拍鳥的情况(或者你當是／沒分別)，我也可以說一下

這隻貓頭鷹幼鳥是父母在一家人的廚房冷氣位生產, 但因為屋主好奇，父母沒回來喂幼，屋主就拿下來看和喂食，片段放在facebook,給我女友看見，當時我們就約到屋主給我們去看, 原本我想是進入屋主家中看的，但原來屋主還請了其他師兄一同來，最後屋主沒有給人進屋，就從屋內拿出來放在地上給所有人拍照，歡迎當日有去的師兄補充~

認識我既朋友大都知當日既事, 也明白我和當日去影燈胸某些朋友心情也一樣，心中沒任何喜悅

這張相片我覺得不光彩, 也有騙人感覺，一隻夜行鳥為什麼會在開陽綠油油的草地上~

如果大家應為哪次拍攝手法低劣，我誠認，說完這個故事後，我是否沒有為這個題目討論的資格?

[ Last edited by smp at 1/01/2011 14:18 ]

Author: Beetle Time: 1/01/2011 17:17

人誰無過? 你問我有沒有用過閃燈拍照? 有。有沒有拍過別人餌誘出來的鳥? 有。有沒有趕走過雀? 有。
以上所提到的, 就算是資深鳥攝者, 當中很多人曾經有做過。 (資深鳥攝者不一定等如資深觀鳥者/資深鳥友)
正如smp所提到, 我曾經做錯過, 我是不是沒有資格說做這些事是不對的/不光采的?
當然, 若果有人說一套做一套, 那絕對是可恥的。

是不是要每個觀鳥者/攝鳥者都要站出來報告他們做錯過的事?
是不是每一件錯事都要被人抓出來批評?

本帖討論關於餌誘拍鳥, 既然每一件事都應該宏觀看, 就不應針對著某人/某事批評, 此舉根本無助討論, 亦只會引致"不必要的討論"被管理者刪除。

Everybody have done wrong things in the past. If you ask me have i ever used flash to take photos of birds, or took bird photos that people baited the bird out, or maked the bird fly away, I would answer "yes" to all of the above. I believe many experienced bird photographers have done the same in the past.
As smp has said, If i have done wrong in the past, does it mean i don't have the right to say those things are wrong / are disgraceful?
Of course, if i say something is wrong but i still do it after so, this is of course shameful.

However, do every bird watcher/bird photographer need to report what they have done wrong?
Do all of those need to be criticized by somebody?

The post is about baiting birds for photos and we need to look at the broader picture, absolutely not by criticizing somebody / some past events (especially those that are irrelevant). These would not help in discussion and would only lead to an end, like deleted posts and locked posts by administrator of the forum.

[ Last edited by Beetle at 1/01/2011 22:07 ]

Author: EricB Time: 1/01/2011 18:28

Call me old fashioned, but ‘Baiting’ used to mean feeding an animal with a malicious intention to capture (physically – not just on film) or  kill it. The demise of the English language has given it a broader meaning now, which I think just muddies the water.

My interpretation of this thread , is that it is about luring . A deliberate attempt to draw an animal into the open for the purpose of observing /photographing it; without any intention of harming the beast.

Within this category is pishing, tape luring, imitating bird calls, feeding – bird tables, chumming, sticking ‘magic Bluethroat paste from a small box’  etc..

Once these lines are drawn it is straightforward to see where most of us stand.
We condone harming the bird, but most of us really, really want to get a look at the bird.

It can easily be argued that providing food is certainly a lot better for the birds welfare than pishing or tape luring.

I know if I was a bird , which one I would prefer. Give me the food any day.

The really interesting thing about the original article is that this chap who produced this magic paste from a small box, clearly is ahead of the game in field craft. I’ve been birding for over 35 years and it never even crossed my mind that a bird like a Bluethroat could be made to land on a particular perch with anything short of magic or good luck.

If you think about it, this field craft has to have come out of hunting for necessity.
I am very grateful that the photographer provided food in exchange for a photo. Many people through out the world provide food with the sole intention of eating or capturing the animal. This is progress , no harm was done. In fact, photographs are a fantastic medium to engage people to go out and enjoy nature firsthand (the first step to environmental enlightenment!)  Nothing but patience and encouragement to continue appreciating natural beauty is required; this is work in evolution.

eRic

P.S. Many thanks to Beetle for translating the original article.

[ Last edited by RUWright at 1/01/2011 18:54 ]

Author: Beetle Time: 1/01/2011 22:24

To eric,

Thanks for clarifying about wordings. I thought baiting is using food while luring may use something else, but I am not aware of the ultimate intension (killing of prey etc.).

The "unknown thing" used to put on the branch would probably be some sort of food rather than some magic paste. I believe it was some sort of worms kept in a little box, but the writer of the original article didn't know what it was or just did't want to say. Sorry for misleading you and maybe next time i would probably add some captions.

I do really want to translate the chinese replies for those who don't fully understand but i don't really have time to translate all the posts.
Would try to summarize some of the main ideas from different people (i am not going to translate meaningless criticisms):

- luring ("baiting") for photos is a kind of cheating
- luring is not a graceful way of taking photos
- some people may not have the chance to observe real behaviours of a bird if some other people are luring it

- putting food to a bird doesn't do any harm to the bird
- luring would help ensuring photographers to behave better, avoid flushing of birds etc.

Beetle

[ Last edited by Beetle at 2/01/2011 00:33 ]

Author: ying Time: 2/01/2011 19:16

唉！想不到我寫的中文如此難明:1)我嘅意思係如果兩種做法都係錯的話？！我會 '兩害取其輕'。

2)雞蛋雞場是講一種，因為小問題而被不停誇大為一發不可收拾的問題。的歪打方式。另外 '是不是各下應為有對某些持別情怳才需要用餌誘呢? 比如有人不守秩序時? 我不應該想得太極端? 因我應為特別鳥種會比較容易出現不守秩序的情况~' 對不起！這一段我唔明閣下說甚麼，我試寫一次，請不要介意。理解如下 : '是不是閣下認為在某些特別情怳之下，才需要使用餌誘呢? 譬如有人不守秩序時? 我就不應該把事情想得太極端? 因我認為在特別鳥種出現時，會比較容易出現不守秩序的情况~ 是這樣解讀嗎？

3)我寫這個拍攝事情是順著閣下所寫'鳳頭鵐和褐頭鵐我也拍到了, 只是企著就拍到了, 可能是運氣,.....' 我只是覺得閣下那次(貓頭鷹)拍攝得更輕鬆而矣，而且講真心說話 ; 我本人覺得如此拍照，並無不妥！我還給你女友的 post 加分呢！甚麼人誰無過的..........可不是出自我手呢！說到有沒有討論這個題目的資格，是管理員的權力吧，與我何干？我就曾經被管理員刪除 post 嘞！

[ Last edited by ying at 2/01/2011 20:01 ]

Author: ying Time: 2/01/2011 19:31

Quote:

Original posted by Beetle at 1/01/2011 17:17
人誰無過? 你問我有沒有用過閃燈拍照? 有。有沒有拍過別人餌誘出來的鳥? 有。有沒有趕走過雀? 有。
以上所提到的, 就算是資深鳥攝者, 當中很多人曾經有做過。 (資深鳥攝者不一定等如資深觀鳥者/資深鳥友)
正如smp ...

請問我那一句說這樣拍攝是錯的呢？還是閣下自己一向認為這樣拍攝是錯事吧？！未知真相就下筆批判！是閣下所長嗎？閣下常常喜歡自話自說嗎？跟'蛇雕謊言'(蛇鵰仍在塱原此事到現在仍未見正式由鳥會澄清)有何分別？閣下此種行為在我看來是'尋釁生事'！如果管理員刪除此帖，閣下應負上最大責任！

[ Last edited by ying at 2/01/2011 20:06 ]

Author: VRII Time: 2/01/2011 21:48

唔識英文,可否將英文翻譯做中文?

Author: Beetle Time: 2/01/2011 23:26

應VRII翻譯英文回覆的重點 (抱歉沒有時間翻譯全文)

-在某些外國國家有鼓勵餵飼野生雀鳥
-在香港, 因為人口及雀鳥密度都高, 餵飼雀鳥需要經過詳細考慮
-一些記錄片有用誘餌拍攝
-(mguy)在南丫島的家製造一個水池吸引雀鳥/於米埔餵魚給鸕鶿,跟應不應餌誘雀鳥這些問題都有很多變數
-在某些地點(如獅子山郊野公園, 金山郊野公園, 城門郊野公園, 大埔滘自然保護區)及附近地區餵飼野生動物是犯法的
-(張浩輝博士) 香港觀鳥會不應該鼓勵用誘餌, 但也不應該批評此舉; 有時很難界定"為保育雀鳥餵飼"及"餵飼雀鳥去拍照"

Author: Sze Time: 3/01/2011 23:52

米埔放雜魚餵養鸕鶿的原因:
http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/200201/30/0130195.htm

WWF在基圍#3給鸕鶿餵飼雜魚 2010/11:
http://www.hkbws.org.hk/BBS/view ... &extra=page%3D1

[ Last edited by Sze at 4/01/2011 01:21 ]

Author: fkm Time: 5/01/2011 00:03

Well.......I just received the New Year Greeting from Birdforum...

Quote:

Please remember to feed the birds in this cold spell in the UK and Europe. For quality bird food and feeders, please visit xxxxxx (detail of advertiser removed).

Finally, we'd like to once again wish you all a happy new year and hope that 2011 brings fantastic birding, health and happiness.

Kind Regards,

Admin
admin@birdforum.net

Author: VRII Time: 5/01/2011 00:46

唔該哂Beetle兄嘅重點翻譯,原來唔係一面倒,不過兄台都鬼馬咯,想知RUWright的言論,可否幫忙?

樓主,從你的用詞,唔見得你是想交流,而是批評!
唔好下下用唔同平台針對住,應該學下主席嘅思維。

SZE
鸕鶿係香港食嘅魚係家鄉同種?候鳥點知去到避寒地方有咩種嘅食物,食魚就乜魚都食,食蟲就乜蟲都食,重要揀?
你都識講侯鳥係睇天氣遷徒,鸕鶿被餵足一季都會走,更何況只有幾餐加餸嘅雀仔。
擲石,留下垃圾等等行為皆不可容,不能置疑。
其餘的個人猜測,未有實例支持前,不能苟同。

Author: ying Time: 6/01/2011 02:05

Quote:

Original posted by Sze at 3/01/2011 23:52

http://images4. ...

一個要為籠養而去誘捕野鳥的不法之徒所持有的捕鳥方法定非你我所能企及！根本與餌誘拍照毫不相干！
烏鴉在日本歷史上與日本民衆的關係你知道嗎？(閣下以日本烏鴉作例，如果不知道，不要問我，請自己去查)
香港猴子要搶人類食物主要原因真的是因為人為餵飼嗎？
米埔造景餌誘豆雁，導使鴨飛鷸走！大製作也，無意見！？造個綠底插條樹枝餵條蟲影下雀仔，就導致生態失衡？就不光彩！？

[ Last edited by ying at 8/01/2011 03:00 ]

Author: Sze Time: 6/01/2011 02:08

食物非當地原生，我擔心的不是動物吃不慣，我是怕那些食剩了或逃脫了的活餌會對當地生態有未知的影響。福壽螺及薇甘菊也是人為帶入的外來入侵物種，我想當初引入時也未必想到日後會對生態造成這麼大的影響。

加餸如果只是幾餐還好，只怕聞風而至的善長人翁會駱驛不絕，在沒有人負責叫停的情況下，供應會源源不絕。而且在香港，在人類的世界裡真的有那麼多「免費午餐」嗎？

大自然生物間的關係就如中國的陰陽五行有著相生相剋的關係。在每個地方均有屬於當地的野鳥及生物，牠們之間有著千絲萬縷的關係。有些雀鳥負責幫助指定地方的種子傳播，另一些則是負責控制指定地方的昆蟲數目，每種動植物在生態系統中都有其天職及重要性，當牠們每位都安份地各施其位時，這就構成了生態的平衡。如果我們隨意改變了動物的食性，也就有機會改變了生態的平衡。

我在網上留言討論從沒有妄想說服什麼人，*****本帖部份內容由討論區管理人刪除*****，很多事情除了包裝精美的一面外，還有別人受苦的一面，你可以說我多慮了，但我寧願是我多慮，也不希望我的憂慮有天會變成事實。

Author: wcaptain Time: 6/01/2011 14:53

FYI. I was told there was a bird table (food feeding) at Tai Po Kau (near the picnic area) many many yrs (1970s?). Just to attract birds.

I also read an article that BBC has taken footage of Blue Magpie foraging a cake at a garden of an expat's home on the Peak (1970s?).

So, if just a small amount of food (without hygiene problem) and birds do not suffer from food feeding, it seems that such food feeding is not a big deal.

Of course, the rule of thrumb is "no overfeeding" and "no disturbance to the birds, in particular during the breeding season".

Author: HFCheung Time: 6/01/2011 19:23

I am not the chairman since the last AGM meeting in Sept this year.  I can only represent myself.  I wish to ask "what have we learned or gained from this discussion?".

I think photographic bird records are excellent.  Photos allows us to see details that we cannot see before.  Many series of excellent birds photography have allowed us to learn much more on bird behavior.
For example, I recently learned that Long-tailed Shrike would harass Little Grebe so as to get a fish from the Grebe's stomach.

The act of bird photography play a very important role in the history of birdwatching in HK.  Because of them, we can have excellent photos for reporting bird news in mass media. There are many people learning to appreciate the beauty of birds on the web every day.  Now HK people understand much more about bird watching, mostly through excellent bird photos.  The support for HKBWS has grown tremendously.

I understand that there are subtle differences between the so-called "traditional bird watcher" and "electronic-assisted bird watcher".  I think there are a lot of common value to share among us.  For example, should we be united to fight against Nam Sang Wai development?  I think we should.

So I really suggest that we lay down the small differences that may exist between you and I, so that we can work together towards a higher goal.

HF Cheung

[ Last edited by HFCheung at 13/01/2011 14:22 ]

Author: davylam Time: 6/01/2011 21:54

Quote:

Original posted by HFCheung at 6/01/2011 19:23
I am not the chairman since the last AGM meeting in late Sept this year. I can only represent myself. I wish to ask "what have we learned or gained from this discussion?".

I think photographic bir ...

Fully support of Mr. Cheung's point of view. Concentrate on the big issue, flight for the true justice. Flight for Nam Sang Wai and put the grey issue aside.

If we could gather the power of all the bird watcher and bird photographer together, we will do much more for the nature.

[ Last edited by davylam at 6/01/2011 22:39 ]

Author: fkm Time: 6/01/2011 23:53

其實我也不明白為甚麼還有鳥攝者有興趣參加討論...歷來爭拗雙方都誓不兩立, 一方不惜造謠/斷章取義去抹黑, 反正攝影者怎樣都是錯的. 從來雙方都已有既定立場, 講來都浪費唇舌, 何必呢?

關於用不用餌這個問題, 真係不用討論的. 各人自己怎樣相信便怎樣相信吧. 某地區的鳥圖差不多全都是"餵"出來的, 否則甚麼帝雉, 藍腹鷴竟會定點差不多天天現身? 不要過去拍個開開心心回來便自欺欺人地當自己很好鳥運吧! 外國不少高水準鳥圖都開宗明義地標示baited. 其他地區的攝影師弄了起碼十多年了吧? 出過些甚麼事了? 現今資訊發達, 不同地區的交流瀕繁, 香港的影友們聽多了, 見識多了, 自有主意. 我個人看, 另一方喜歡也好, 不喜歡也好, 大勢所趨, 潮流已經不可逆轉了.

至於保護生態方面的議題, 我個人看不是攝影師們不想支持, 而是某一派別向來自視為唯一的保育者, 歇力打擊和排躋有不同意見的人. 既然次次都有你講無人講, 咁點一齊玩?

又係重溫某鳥攝大師年初的教誨的時侯了:

Quote:

我個人只對XX不以為然，好多標簽化／對立化係他好耐前已開風越吹越烈，好耐前某位的一些行為有問題，由於他是用大腳架的，果位XX當時又標榜用 328 手持周圍追得好好，就話”見到用大腳架的都要小心，好可能係壞人“，真係好好笑
後來又有次同我講“講保育幾時輪到XXX 講呀!!？" , OK , 你自以為是到係有你講無人講咪自然咩都惹火嘍，還要搞到鳥會個網成自己網的 copycat ,搞個人化。
有你講無人講／好多野過唔到他人，但過到自己，講用閃燈影雀，果位XX自己咪一樣有用過，結果好多本來保育的議題，都在這些雙重標準的不屑中無被討論，結果反而係自以為是的繼續自以為是，不屑的繼續不屑。

...那些一跳出來已惹人不屑的，根本都唔係在做保育，只不過係通過二分化／標簽化其他人”非保育“，來自我標簽滿足下罷了。

和地球有關的事，要所有人都一齊做才能成功，而只有通過教育推廣才能影響到所有人，要做到影響，要人認同你的理念，要人肯由心聽你才行，那些玩二分化對立的，不過係想自我滿足下的假保育嘍 ………..

不過, 上次吵完之後, 根本看不到情況有任何改變. 無論是網上/傳媒, 仍有一波又一波"唱衰"運動在進行. 別有用心的人不斷用半真半假的資料, 抹黑全部鳥攝者 (蛇鵰的報導算是近期的"傑"作). 在這種氛圍下, 要攜手合作? 有難度啊!

Author: Sze Time: 7/01/2011 23:57

鳥攝不一定要用餌誘的，只是可能要用上很多運氣同耐性，有一部份攝影人士是仍然堅持單靠自己的運氣及耐性去拍攝自己滿意的作品。
用了餌誘就容易拍得多，也有把握得多，這就完全迎合了部份習慣生活上所有事都一定要快靚正及一定要必中的人。

[ Last edited by Sze at 7/01/2011 23:58 ]

Author: ying Time: 8/01/2011 00:54

Quote:

Original posted by davylam at 6/01/2011 21:54

Fully support of Mr. Cheung's point of view. Concentrate on the big issue, flight for the true justice. Flight for Nam Sang Wai and put the grey issue aside.

If we could gather the power of all the ...

相當同意！

Author: ying Time: 8/01/2011 01:09

鳥攝不一定要用餌誘的，只是可能要用上很多運氣同耐性，這是大家都知道的！還用說嗎？有一部份攝影人士是仍然堅持單靠自己的運氣及耐性去拍攝自己滿意的作品。這是他們認為最好，又可以滿足自己的方式，我個人十分尊敬 ; 欣賞這些人仕的堅持！用了餌誘就容易拍得多，也有把握得多，這就完全迎合了部份習慣生活上所有事都一定要快靚正及一定要必中的人。這樣拍攝有何不好？即食麵？急功近利？那麼大家不如用筆去畫鳥吧！餌誘拍鳥就一定會成功嗎？

[ Last edited by ying at 8/01/2011 16:27 ]

Author: ying Time: 8/01/2011 01:55

食物非當地原生，我擔心的不是動物吃不慣，我是怕那些食剩了或逃脫了的活餌會對當地生態有未知的影響。福壽螺及薇甘菊也是人為帶入的外來入侵物種，我想當初引入時也未必想到日後會對生態造成這麼大的影響。又亂打譬如嘞！那麼你知道麥皮蟲是如何繁殖的嗎？而且福壽螺及薇甘菊是有規模有目的地讓它們大量繁殖的！根本不可混為一談！
加餸如果只是幾餐還好，只怕聞風而至的善長人翁會駱驛不絕，在沒有人負責叫停的情況下，供應會源源不絕。而且在香港，在人類的世界裡真的有那麼多「免費午餐」嗎？
源源不絕！？請閣下多點去觀察吧，藍喉 ; 紅脅等都經已門庭冷落了！
大自然生物間的關係就如中國的陰陽五行有著相生相剋的關係。在每個地方均有屬於當地的野鳥及生物，牠們之間有著千絲萬縷的關係。有些雀鳥負責幫助指定地方的種子傳播，另一些則是負責控制指定地方的昆蟲數目，每種動植物在生態系統中都有其天職及重要性，當牠們每位都安份地各施其位時，這就構成了生態的平衡。如果我們隨意改變了動物的食性，也就有機會改變了生態的平衡。
如果閣下所言有理，那麼依你之說 : 米埔造境放魚，鳥會種田引鳥，豈非罪大惡極！？
我在網上留言討論從沒有妄想說服什麼人，*****本帖部份內容由討論區管理人刪除*****，很多事情除了包裝精美的一面外，還有別人受苦的一面，你可以說我多慮了，但我寧願是我多慮，也不希望我的憂慮有天會變成事實。
要說服別人需要的是品德和能力。*****本帖部份內容由討論區管理人刪除*****閣下所舉的例子....似是而非！穿鑿附會！難以令人信服，(例如猴子索食一例，牽強不實！)包裝精美容易嗎？受苦之說更是無稽！何苦之有？閣下一定未見過赤腹鷹餓到無力飛行要在地上垃圾堆尋找食物那種淒涼苦况了！

Author: ying Time: 8/01/2011 16:21

*****本帖內容由討論區管理人刪除*****

Author: HKBWS Chuan Time: 8/01/2011 19:35

請各位討論時留意登錄條約 ( http://www.hkbws.org.hk/BBS/view ... &extra=page%3D1 ), 若對管理員的判斷或決定有任何意見, 或認為他人言論不當, 請以短訊息(pm)向管理員提出。

Please pay attention to the Forum Registration Agreement ( http://www.hkbws.org.hk/BBS/view ... &extra=page%3D1 ), If you have any opinions about judgements of admins, or if you think there are inappropriate speech/wordings, please P.M. to admins.

Author: ying Time: 8/01/2011 20:48

Quote:

Original posted by Conservation at 8/01/2011 19:35
請各位討論時留意登錄條約 ( http://www.hkbws.org.hk/BBS/view ... &extra=page%3D1 ), 若對管理員的判斷或決定有任何意見, 或認為他人言論不當, 請以短訊息(pm)向管理員提出。

Please pay attention ...

我同意管理員的提示，但亦請管理員作出行動前先清楚整件事情的始没，別只對我的發言作出行動，(因此舉有令人誤會為針對性行為)是盼！謝謝！

[ Last edited by ying at 8/01/2011 20:50 ]

Author: fkm Time: 8/01/2011 21:32

Quote:

Original posted by ying at 8/01/2011 01:09
餌誘拍鳥就一定會成功嗎？

我非相同意此說! 也希望大眾不要以為用餌誘拍便是"即食麵"式拍攝手法.

首先, 投餌不一定成功, 視乎鳥種及個體而定. 舉例說加拿大的雪鴞, 大家都知道要投放活鼠作餌的, 但原來只有約十分之一的雪鴞個體會被餌誘近拍攝者. 十分之九的雪鴞是不為所動的. 真如某些人描述那樣, 一投餌便可拍嗎? 有一位台灣攝影師跟我說, 早年要拍藍腹鷴, 要"餵"一個月以上, 才能令目標走出空曠位置進行拍攝. 不要單看拍攝期間吧, 背後攝影師付出的努力真會少嗎?

Author: lalan Time: 8/01/2011 23:50

Quote:

Original posted by fkm at 8/01/2011 21:32

我非相同意此說! 也希望大眾不要以為用餌誘拍便是"即食麵"式拍攝手法.

首先, 投餌不一定成功, 視乎鳥種及個體而定. 舉例說加拿大的雪鴞, 大家都知道要投放活鼠作餌的, 但原來只有約十分之一的雪鴞個體會被餌誘近 ...

成功率低與是否正確的行為有何關係？

Author: fkm Time: 9/01/2011 00:28

Quote:

Original posted by lalan at 8/01/2011 23:50

成功率低與是否正確的行為有何關係？

我有說過這行為是正確或不正確嗎? 我正在回應有人明示或暗示投餌是省時或保證拍攝成功的謬論. 為何你可以將我的發言引伸到其他地方??? 你這是甚麼意思?

Author: lalan Time: 10/01/2011 00:18

我只是問問題，表示我不明白的意思。
我沒有引導問題去價值判斷的意思。

Author: wcaptain Time: 10/01/2011 10:01

Just last week. I watched Disney Channel with my daughter. One of the programs was "special agent OSO". This special agent taught kids how to make their own bird feeders in three steps. These three steps were

Step 1
Find a cone

Step 2
Stick seeds together with the cone with peasant butter

Step 3
Hang out the cone (over a tree branch) with a ribbon

Very simple and easy. Unlikely to create a lot of disturbance to birds and the environment.

In case, people like to take photos with provision of food (nobody can stop them by law, except in country parks/protected areas). We may encourage them to use more ecologically friendly approach. This approach can be considered. Do remember not to over feeding and disturbing the birds.e

[ Last edited by wcaptain at 11/01/2011 11:04 ]

Author: Sze Time: 11/01/2011 00:32

福壽螺原本引入是用來食用,後來因銷路不佳便被隨意遺棄於水道中。
至於薇甘菊在香港我倒不知道它是有規模有目的地大量繁殖，
ying兄如不介意，可否分享一下？

外國的情況我不了解故亦不作置評。
但在香港，如果用餌不能增加大家拍攝的機會，
又或者不能把鳥兒引導到你們想鳥兒到的"指定場地"，
我倒希望可以了解一下有什麼原因令大家肯花錢買餌去餌誘鳥攝？

Author: VRII Time: 11/01/2011 10:03

Quote:

Original posted by Sze at 6/01/2011 02:08
大自然生物間的關係就如中國的陰陽五行有著相生相剋的關係。在每個地方均有屬於當地的野鳥及生物，牠們之間有著千絲萬縷的關係。有些雀鳥負責幫助指定地方的種子傳播，另一些則是負責控制指定地方的昆蟲數目，每種動植物在生態系統中都有其天職及重要性，當牠們每位都安份地各施其位時，這就構成了生態的平衡。如果我們隨意改變了動物的食性，也就有機會改變了生態的平衡。

哦,原來有三兩隻同種鳥被餌誘，便令整個群種改變食性，影響左生態玉衡，呢個罪名真係大咯。
更何況你也見過有不同誘餌，梗係針對唔同食性嘅雀而用，呢d係迎合,唔係改變。莫非見過有人用麥皮蟲餵鸕鶿？
請不要無限上綱!!

Quote:

Original posted by Sze at 11/01/2011 00:32
外國的情況我不了解故亦不作置評。
但在香港，如果用餌不能增加大家拍攝的機會，
又或者不能把鳥兒引導到你們想鳥兒到的"指定場地"，
我倒希望可以了解一下有什麼原因令大家肯花錢買餌去餌誘鳥攝？

你唔瞭解外國，差不多等如唔暸解香港。
前文亦有提到，餌誘係唔一定成功；例如釣魚，落左魚餌一定釣到魚?點解仲有咁多人釣魚?無需多問。

唉，都係呢度大部份外國人豁達d，中文人大多有門户之見....
影相嘅野，各人要求，各施各法。
你有權話邊個邊個唔啱，但請不要借媒體抹黑！
套用隔離阿邊個網嘅金句: 我有我影雀，理鬼你嘈到拆天
不再在此題發言。

P.S. SZE，雀鳥唔應該分cheap唔cheap，我開始懷疑閣下愛鳥的真偽。

[ Last edited by VRII at 11/01/2011 10:33 ]

Author: ying Time: 11/01/2011 13:49

回覆 SZE :福壽螺原本引入是用來食用,後來因銷路不佳便被隨意遺棄於水道中。閣下原來都知道福壽螺的引入係作人類食用用途的，與餌誘拍鳥根本毫不相關！至於薇甘菊在香港我倒不知道它是有規模有目的地大量繁殖，薇甘菊是當日那些所謂'專家'(如果幫乜乜機構做環保計劃的'專家'，在下不材，都識一兩個

)引入薇甘菊來對當地其他植物作出...........咦！個例子係閣下所舉，閣下不知就裏就拿來作例子！？真係知就笑死，唔知就嚇死！閣下重有幾多個舉例係咁樣咖？！其實現在有互聯網，世界變得好細，俾小小時間就可以得到好多想要的知識，自己的事請自己做。
ying兄如不介意，可否分享一下？介意咖！

外國的情況我不了解故亦不作置評。本地人/外國人嘅見識不一定對，也不一定錯！而且許多事件在今天是對的，但到了明天可能會變成錯！所以事事要都要多多了解。但在香港，如果用餌不能增加大家拍攝的機會，
又或者不能把鳥兒引導到你們想鳥兒到的"指定場地"，
我倒希望可以了解一下有什麼原因令大家肯花錢買餌去餌誘鳥攝？餌誘鳥攝，餌 ; 不一定要花錢買的。(唔好問，自己去查)

綜觀今次討論 : 幾許劣幣驅逐良幣之說，樓主真係冇憂心錯咖！

[ Last edited by ying at 11/01/2011 14:03 ]

Author: ying Time: 11/01/2011 13:58

Quote:

Original posted by lalan at 8/01/2011 23:50

成功率低與是否正確的行為有何關係？

用了餌誘就容易拍得多，也有把握得多，這就完全迎合了部份習慣生活上所有事都一定要快靚正及一定要必中的人。(引用自 SZE 的發言)

這個問題不是應該向最先發言者 SZE 發問嗎？

[ Last edited by ying at 11/01/2011 13:59 ]

Author: Sze Time: 13/01/2011 04:13

ying兄，向你查詢薇甘菊的問題，不是我懶惰，只是動植物的中文名稱並沒有劃一的標準，不同的地方可能會使用不同的中文名稱，造成一種植物有多個不同的中文名稱，又或是同一個中文名稱亦可同時代表兩個不同品種植物的情況出現，所以我想先弄清楚你跟我說的是否同一植物。

此外，我說的薇甘菊是屬於菊科植物，學名為Mikania micrantha Kunth，大部分本地的網上的資料與及【香港植物誌】第三冊亦只提及它是外來植物，並早於1884年已在香港出現。資料內文提及薇甘菊在本港蔓延的原因，可能由於近數十年來農業式微，而它在荒廢農地的蔓延情況也特別嚴重，可是並沒有提及引入的原因。

漁護署資料：
http://www.afcd.gov.hk/tc_chi/conservation/con_flo/About_Mikania/about_mikania.html

長春社資料：
http://www.conservancy.org.hk/conser/mikania/index.htm

維基百科的資料：
http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hk/%E5%B0%8F%E8%8A%B1%E8%94%93%E6%BE%A4%E8%98%AD

香港有記錄的植物品種超過3000種，有不認識的植物，有不知道的資料，實在不足為奇，但感謝香港自然生態論壇植物版的版友們無私的分享，令我這個植物的門外漢對香港的植物增加了多一點點認識，所以我習慣了有不明白或不知道的事，也會不恥下問，虛心請教。但如果你介意分享的話，我也不會強人所難，只好留待日後我有時間的話才再自行找答案。

在我之前的回應中以福壽螺及薇甘菊為例是想說明我憂慮若那些動植物的餌不小心流落野外的話，會有機會可能在野外生長，或會影響當地的生物及生態環境。正如當初人們無意間將薇甘菊帶入香港，又或是將福壽螺遺棄在水道時也不會想到，牠們會在香港野外繁殖得這麼快，並會帶來如斯嚴重的生態影響。對於疾病，預防是勝於治療的，對於一些我們未知是否會危害環境的事，我們是否也應該小心處理，避免一些不必要的問題出現呢？保育雀鳥，除了要保護鳥兒本身外，牠們需要的生態環境，我們也需要一併保護的。

對於「藍喉 ; 紅脅等都經已門庭冷落了！」這個好消息的出現我會有以下的推想：

1.
可能有另一隻新model鳥出現了，令人們都轉往了別處。
2.
善長人翁不如我想像中多。（阿Q地想這可能是因我發狂地在網上咆哮之後，令有些人不敢去做善長人翁 :p）

回VRII：

cheap雀不是我對鳥兒的稱呼，是我聽過有些人對一些common bird的稱呼。其實每種雀鳥都有其生態角色及重要性，都應該有其生存空間，所以我覺得我需要為牠們做點事。

至於你說開始懷疑我愛鳥的真偽。偉大如耶穌或佛祖都會有人懷疑祂們，更何況是我這些小如微塵的普通凡人。我一向做事都只是向鳥兒們交待，向與我共事的鳥友交待，向自己交待。加入香港觀鳥會擔任義務工作全是因為想為保護鳥兒出一分力。保育雀鳥背後需有賴很多有心的義工分擔很多不同的工作才能達到目標，拍攝雀鳥照片編輯成圖鑑是其中一項工作，但照片及圖鑑只是一件工具，如果在工具製作時就已經帶來一些「原本可以避免的傷害」於雀鳥時，那這件工具的價值是否已經變了質呢？又或者將來如果有一天有人告訴我香港觀鳥會不再是「欣賞及保育香港鳥類及其自然生態的組織」，而變成了為鳥攝而妄顧鳥兒利益的組織時，我一定頭也不回的立即辭退所有現在義務擔任的職務，並以我自己的方法繼續去為鳥兒爭取應有的利益及生存空間。

我要說的大致也已經說過了，我因為需要在這星期內專心預備兩個有關雀鳥的講座PowerPoint，所以我應該不會再有時間查看或回應此帖子了，就此擱筆。

Author: ying Time: 13/01/2011 21:25

所有事情最重要的是分清真僞！不能指鹿為馬，我指出閣下所列舉的例子全部出錯！是想告訴閣下不能因為要維護自己的固有原則而不顧一切！隨便舉出一些毫無關連 ; 似是而非的例子去誤導別人！此舉有抹黑之嫌！叫閣下自己找資料，是想閣下自己改正自己提出的那些錯誤例子，此舉有兩個目的，一 : 你可以糾正自己的錯處。二 : 受閣下誤導的人由閣下自己作出正確的解釋。事實由閣下自己證明閣下所舉的例子是錯的！甚麼引入一說 ; 始作俑者是誰呢？好了，由閣下自己提供資料說明並無引入！如今真相大白！預防勝於治療，這是不爭的事實！如果閣下憂心破壞環境，應了解如何餌誘攝鳥，或者再提一提台灣用麵包蟲(港稱麥皮蟲)餌攝經已有很長的時間了，他們的生態環境可有被破壞呢？
紅脅 : 藍喉之所以門庭冷落，閣下說的我不敢全部反對，只是有些保留，其實香港攝鳥的人仕數量不是很多，風潮過後自然就小了人流，蛇鵰就是一個例子，這是顯而易見的實情，所以源源不絶的供應，根本不可能。
再者恕我多言，請不要把宗教的神明也拿來作譬如，此舉可大可小！慎之！
在此謹祝講座順利！再見！

[ Last edited by ying at 13/01/2011 21:27 ]

Author: fkm Time: 14/01/2011 02:01

Quote:

Original posted by ying at 13/01/2011 21:25
台灣用麵包蟲(港稱麥皮蟲)餌攝經已有很長的時間了，他們的生態環境可有被破壞呢？

我個人覺得台灣普羅大眾對環境保育意識非常非常高, 比香港一般市民強多了. 可能是因為他們的生態攝影水準高, 圖片每每令人讚嘆, 一般人看到的總會對大自然多點崇敬之心吧.

Author: Robert Time: 16/01/2011 00:05

Do you think baiting birds to take photos is consistent with the objectives of the Society?
各位認為用餌誘鳥兒來拍照合乎本會宗旨嗎？
"是否合符觀鳥會宗旨"同"會否對鳥類造成負面影嚮"是兩回事喎，究竟你地討論緊邊樣呀？

Author: ying Time: 16/01/2011 00:49

Quote:

Original posted by Robert at 16/01/2011 00:05
Do you think baiting birds to take photos is consistent with the objectives of the Society?
各位認為用餌誘鳥兒來拍照合乎本會宗旨嗎？
"是否合符觀鳥會宗旨"同"會否對鳥類造成負面影嚮"是兩回事喎，究竟你地討論 ...

請看15#。

Author: Robert Time: 16/01/2011 12:01

Quote:

Original posted by ying at 16/01/2011 00:49

請看15#。

其實，我要搞清楚係傾緊乜野。如果係講鳥會宗旨:
香港觀鳥會的宗旨是研究、欣賞和保育本地的鳥類，並且促進會員間的交流，分享觀鳥方面的經驗和資訊。
鳥類對人為干擾較敏感，進行觀鳥和鳥類攝影活動時必須小心在意，以免影響雀鳥的正常生活或危害其生存。
咁就要先以實例或權威文獻，證明餌誘會影響雀鳥的正常生活或危害其生存。宗旨是研究.....，可以包括捕捉喎，唔捉點套腳環呀？

但係若改為傾守則:
觀鳥及鳥類攝影守則 Code of Conduct for Birdwatching and Photography本會制訂了以下會員行為守則，要求會員遵守，並向廣大市民展示觀鳥和鳥類攝影的良好行為模範。
1.　以鳥為先
無論是觀鳥或拍攝鳥類照片，都要以盡量不影響鳥類的正常活動為原則，避免造成干擾。
　　a.　如果發現雀鳥顯得不安、有規避或其他異常反應，便要馬上停止
　　b.　如果在場拍攝和觀看的人太多，尤其要特別留意
　　c.　不要企圖影響雀鳥的行為，如驚嚇、驅趕或使用誘餌
寫得咁清楚，咁就唔使傾啦，入會果陣無睇清楚咩？守則就係守則，對、錯都要守為之守則嘛。

“宗旨”就太早傾，”守則”就唔使傾，無野啦！唔係會員就更加唔使傾啦，呢單係家事，外人不便插手。但守則對內，宗旨對外，小弟才有感而發。

會員遵守守則是合理的，你情我願嘛！但千萬唔好將呢d守則搬到廣大市民家裡去啊，因為所謂影響都係推測、假設，強加於非會員就有點........... 。如果有人犯法，舉報後會有政府執法人員，以合法既方式執行職務。

Author: ying Time: 16/01/2011 16:19

我嘗試大膽套用唐英年司長最近的發言而作出改動 : 凡事總有正反兩面，要辯證地看問題。在反對餌誘攝鳥一面的同時，我們也應該清醒地看到它們的另一面。

大部分反對餌誘攝鳥的基調是爭取鳥兒的權益和會破壞生態，爭取自己認同的觀/攝鳥理念，強調的是「我」或者「我們」才對。可是從來都缺乏實質的證據去證明！香港是一個自由社會，市民最珍惜的基本價值當中，「自由」在任何時候都是名列前茅。再加上我們實施的是法治社會，大家追求的是法治，不是人治。如果對方犯了法，大可以尋求法律制裁犯法者。
第二點就是不要搞思想壟斷。這個世界是豐富多元的，我們應該有包容的胸襟，不能只管自己的喜惡，而是要尊重他人的想法和意見，而不是對持相反意見的人動輒口誅筆伐，甚至不惜借傳媒抹黑或做出不當的行為去干擾對方！

我一直相信，人類重要的美德就是謙恭（humility）和自我反省（self-reflection）。剛愎自用加上不顧一切，最後只會得不償失。

由此引伸出的第三點，可能是很多原則性極強的朋友所鄙視或者不屑為之的，就是「妥協」。當然我們可以想一些更順耳的字眼，例如「策略性讓步」、例如「曲線前進」等。

官員的發言我一向很小贊同，但這一次卻令我有所感觸。

[ Last edited by ying at 16/01/2011 18:19 ]

Author: jojomau Time: 4/02/2011 21:39

A similar but much smaller debate on baiting birds arises now on dchome.net. May I quote a message post there and ask those who know Taiwan to comment on the representation?

"...就說台灣，鳥友長期餵飼，鳥種和數量有增無減。所以你所說的"對鳥類獵食能力有影響"，我應為不成立。"

I took the liberty of quoting this thread on dchome.net with the hope that issue of this kind should be widely debated.

I hereby declare my position. I have never fed nor would I feed birds for photography though I have never contemplated on the issue. I fed birds for times to enjoy being surrounded by them. At the moment, I do not judge those who baited them for photography and I remind myself to keep an open mind.

[ Last edited by jojomau at 4/02/2011 21:47 ]

Welcome to HKBWS Forum 香港觀鳥會討論區 (http://hkbws.org.hk/BBS/)