BWA

關於有人追問紅背伯勞位置一事，
雙方都已經作了交代，
無論誰是誰非，
再糾纏下去也不會有結果，
請大家還是集中討論應該如何分享鳥踪和如何處理敏感地點吧！

I think enough has been said from either side about the incident concerning the Red-backed Shrike, and it is unlikely that the debate could be resolved at this Forum.
Let's focus further discussion on how to share bird news and how to handle sensitive locations.



[ Last edited by BWA at 10/10/2008 22:51 ]

BWA

本地確有一些以照片為先的拍友，不論是出於無知或有意，
為求拍得「好」照片，會不擇手段去于擾雀鳥及破壞自然環境，
以下便是一些例子，在封閉的網上討論空間還有不少：
Out of ignorance or deliberation, there is still a small group of photographers who put photos before birds.
To get their "great" shots, they would go as far as disturbing the birds and destroying their natural habitat.
Below are some examples of such incidents, more can be found in restricted forums on the web.

Selfish guy frightened crested grebe 自私自利的人對住隻鳳頭鸊鷉狂閃閃閃

又一缺德行為攝影實錄! Report on Two Bad Bird Photographers

有關到燕鷗島拍攝照片的討論 Discussion on Taking Photos at Tern Islands

Survey Results at Sai Kung Tern Island 西貢燕鷗島調查結果

今日 Metro 講掉石嚇雀人


嚇雀人影鳳頭鷿鷈


如果你有興趣，在網上還可以找到一些主張不顧鳥類安危去拍照的言論。
For those interested, you may still find discussions on the web about "shooting" practices that disregard the welfare of birds.

有見及此，本會去年中亦發表了一些守則，希望提醒鳥友及拍友要留意，
不要于擾雀鳥和破壞自然：
In view of this, the Society published a set of code to remind birdwatchers and photographers to avoid disturbing birds and their habitats.
觀鳥及鳥類攝影守則 Code of Conduct for Birdwatching and Bird Photography

對無知或不負責任拍友的顧慮，並非閉門空想。
The concern about ignorant or irresponsible photographers is not unfounded.

[ Last edited by BWA at 11/10/2008 23:31 ]

BWA

Quote:

Original posted by twaiyi at 13/10/2008 18:34
下次再有HK First的話，個人覺得如果做法跟這次一樣是「死纏難打」，實在是有點令我感到可怕

雀仔唔使怕，
主席惜（錫）哂你！



[ Last edited by BWA at 14/10/2008 00:51 ]

BWA

如果我個人知道消息，好簡單：
話畀幾位相熟而又可靠（明白、認同及會主動避免于擾）嘅鳥友知，
包括可以協助確認鳥種的資深鳥友，
同時要求對方要小心處理，
唔好令情況失控。

當然，如果能夠控制現場于擾則可以將消息廣為傳播，
但是目前重未有任何可靠方案，
坦白講，我並不相信人人可以自律。

If I got the information personally, very simple:
Tell a few birdwatchers that I know well and can be trusted (those who would understand， agree and will actively avoid disturbance), including experts who may help to confirm the ID.
Ask them to take discretion in spreading the news so that the situation wouldn't get out of control.

Off course, the news could be spread farther and wider if a system is in place to control the disturbance at the site.  However no reliable system is currently in place.  Frankly speaking I don't believe that all people will exercise self discipline without some form of control.

[ Last edited by BWA at 15/10/2008 20:32 ]

BWA

我在 #60 以個人角度回答了主席在 #59 提出的問題，
如果是鳥會收到相關消息，理想中我們或許應該這樣做：

1. 評估如果大量鳥友出現會有甚麼後果（但是由誰做呢？），然後決定如何發放消息，防止給不可信任的人（尤其是已知曾于擾雀鳥和破壞自然的人，或和這些人有密切關係的人）得到。

2. 要尊重發現者的意見，預防措施要得到他的認同。

3. 有系統地組織會員分組到現場看，由義工帶領及維持秩序，參與的人在未知道詳情前要同意只會和可信任的人分享。

好像很複雜，不過我自己在 2006 年曾不慎洩露類似消息，至今仍在後悔。亦因為這樣，私人搞的燕鷗調查只招待熟人。


In post #60 I replied to HF's question in #59 as if I personally got the info.
If the Society receives the news, ideally we should:

1. Assess (but who shall do it?) the consequence if a large crowd turns up, and decide how to release the news while avoiding leakage to unreliable persons (especially those known to have caused disturbance or damage, or are associated with such persons).

2. Respect the view of the informer and obtain his agreement regarding the precautionary measures.

3. Organise the visits in small parties led by volunteer leaders, who would monitor the situation.  Participants should commit beforehand that they would only release the information to trusted persons.

Sounds complicated? but I have leaked similar information inadvertently in 2006, and regret it ever since.  And because of that, I only entertain close friends in my private tern surveys.

[ Last edited by BWA at 15/10/2008 21:11 ]