Question of scruples...

[davidjcusick]

If you're a nature photographer & you happen across a seriously injured... let's say... bird. Do you physically handle the animal & pose it simply for the sake of taking a couple of extreme close-up shots of said animal? I've happened across many injured wildlife in my day & would have never thought about doing such a thing. Just doesn't seem right. What does everyone else think?

[kcoppock]

I wouldn't physically handle it, but I might take a photo of it as is, depending on the situation. There's not really anything I could do to help the animal, taking a photograph won't harm it further, but I don't think I would pose it by hand -- I agree that it doesn't seem right.

[dlambert]

The only time I ever handled an injured animal was when I found a snake injured on a trail. In this case, I'm pretty sure someone had smacked it with a stick, which is a whole other conversation. I picked the snake up and moved it into the woods, behind some brush where it wasn't visible from the trail anymore. In this particular case, I didn't have my camera with me, but I'm not sure a picture would have been appropriate given that the injuries were most likely inflicted by a person. Really a pretty sad scene.

[Jim Poor]

I'd call a wildlife rehab spe******t.

[SusanH1970]

Originally Posted by Jim Poor

I'd call a wildlife rehab spe******t.

So would I.

And I find it really amusing that the censoring took out the word "c i a l i s".

[kcoppock]

Originally Posted by dlambert

The only time I ever handled an injured animal was when I found a snake injured on a trail. In this case, I'm pretty sure someone had smacked it with a stick, which is a whole other conversation. I picked the snake up and moved it into the woods, behind some brush where it wasn't visible from the trail anymore. In this particular case, I didn't have my camera with me, but I'm not sure a picture would have been appropriate given that the injuries were most likely inflicted by a person. Really a pretty sad scene.

Yeah, that is a different situation. Still, I think the shot could have some journalistic merit, posted with the disclaimer that the injuries weren't natural.

Edit: I'm also amused by the censoring. That's a very strict filter.

[Jim Poor]

Originally Posted by SusanH1970

So would I.

And I find it really amusing that the censoring took out the word "c i a l i s".

Too funny - and pretty stupid all at the same time! One would think the software would be smarter than that.

[SwissJon]

I won't touch wildlife, well or injured. Nature does what nature does, I don't touch it unless it's obviously had human intervention prior to my arrival.

[Krusty79]

I think I would only consider helping an injured animal if it were injured because of people. I found an injured snake in the street one time and moved it out of the street and on to someone's lawn because I didn't want a car to run over it. I would not want to pose an injured animal just so I can take a picture.

I felt bad one time because I was riding my bike on a bike path near dusk and surprised some deer. In a panic, one of them ran into a chain link fence and was limping badly. There was nothing I could do, though.

[Jim Bryant]

Let it lie in the position it is. After taking pictures, if the bird is endangered species call wildlife and fish folks, or animal control.