| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/23/2011 02:55:50 PM · #1 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Maybe his buddy would lend one of his teeth for a nice sharp file...
(But make the cake chocolate, not krill.)
:)
 |
Those ain't teeth, though: that's baleen, can't sharpen that very well.
R. |
Yeah, I know, Bear, but that didn't fit the story...
:( |
Baleen (a.k.a. "whalebone") is an extremely dense chitinous substance, and I think it probably can be whittled or ground to a reasonable edge ... perhaps not of cordon bleu caliber, but good enough to use in a knife fight. |
|
|
|
06/23/2011 10:54:38 AM · #2 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by DCNUTTER:
Well, who knows what to believe anymore, but I'm willing to bet that this link adds to the reason...or is the real reason they don't want cameras around. It's regarding the director that wrote the return email to the volunteer.
Link
Dave |
That link reads like the rantings of a mentally ill conspiracy theorist. |
I just got around to reading the link provided here.
It discusses the behavior of this 'director' while he was handling another event.
If even 1/3 of the material contained in that link is true, this guy should not be supervising even a minnow in a fish bowl.
Message edited by author 2011-06-23 11:49:15.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2011 07:48:43 AM · #3 |
There is a definite need for some controls to protect the whales. I know in the past, some whale watching adventures got completely out of hand -- going up to moms with calves -- actually running into the animals.
Also, the volunteers are there to do a job, and it can be dangerous. I wouldn't want fools standing around with cameras instead of doing their job.
However, the reasons given are so incredible ridiculous, the way it was handled was stupid. When there are perfectly valid things in the world, why do people feel the need to look like idiots? |
|
|
|
06/23/2011 06:21:30 AM · #4 |
Art, I'll send you a release. From jail that is, I am guilty of having taken hundreds of whale images. May god have mercy on my soul, I was having a whale of a time.
//www.whalewatchsa.com/
Worth calling on these guys if you want to get a "get out of jail" card. Best whale watching in the world. |
|
|
|
06/23/2011 03:47:22 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Maybe his buddy would lend one of his teeth for a nice sharp file...
(But make the cake chocolate, not krill.)
:)
|
Those ain't teeth, though: that's baleen, can't sharpen that very well.
R. |
Yeah, I know, Bear, but that didn't fit the story...
:(
|
|
|
|
06/23/2011 03:12:52 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by jomari:
How can anyone say that taking photos is disrupting the whales behavior after they tried to beach themselves? Maybe saving them is disrupting their behavior. |
LOl - true. We need a Japanese Dr. Kavorkian to help them beach themselves with dignity. |
|
|
|
06/23/2011 02:21:32 AM · #7 |
How can anyone say that taking photos is disrupting the whales behavior after they tried to beach themselves? Maybe saving them is disrupting their behavior.
I do think that volunteers on the whole are doing their noble best, and the officials behavior sounds rather indicative of a power trip.
Message edited by author 2011-06-23 02:24:25.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2011 12:59:49 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by DCNUTTER:
Well, who knows what to believe anymore, but I'm willing to bet that this link adds to the reason...or is the real reason they don't want cameras around. It's regarding the director that wrote the return email to the volunteer.
Link
Dave |
That link reads like the rantings of a mentally ill conspiracy theorist. |
Apparently he was or still is a director of animal care at the Marine Mammal Conservancy. That's why I said in my post you never know who you can believe. |
|
|
|
06/23/2011 12:49:23 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by DCNUTTER:
Well, who knows what to believe anymore, but I'm willing to bet that this link adds to the reason...or is the real reason they don't want cameras around. It's regarding the director that wrote the return email to the volunteer.
Link
Dave |
That link reads like the rantings of a mentally ill conspiracy theorist.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2011 12:37:17 AM · #10 |
Well, who knows what to believe anymore, but I'm willing to bet that this link adds to the reason...or is the real reason they don't want cameras around. It's regarding the director that wrote the return email to the volunteer.
Link
Dave |
|
|
|
06/23/2011 12:33:22 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by SaraR:
In the UK there are a number of wildlife species - and even some flowers that you can only photograph if you have a permit. |
I don't know what the laws are in the UK, but I looked up the MMPA and it only mentions "commercial and educational photography". Though I suppose you might have to go to court to prove your point, I highly doubt this would extend to all photography and the diretor is clearly speaking out of his blowhole. |
|
|
|
|
06/23/2011 12:23:51 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Maybe his buddy would lend one of his teeth for a nice sharp file...
(But make the cake chocolate, not krill.)
:)
|
Those ain't teeth, though: that's baleen, can't sharpen that very well.
R. |
|
|
|
06/22/2011 11:59:24 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by sfalice:
LOL
I shot the whale. So shoot me.
 |
I'll bake a cake with a file in it and arrange the jail break... |
Maybe his buddy would lend one of his teeth for a nice sharp file...
(But make the cake chocolate, not krill.)
:)
|
|
|
|
06/22/2011 11:01:43 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
My gut feeling is that the volunteer responded like an ass when he was told to hand over the camera, and that the staff was out of patience with him. That doesn't excuse bad behavior, of course, ESPECIALLY not on the part of the director, via e-mail, BUT... As far as the threat of prosecution goes, that's a typical enough chest-thumping approach to try to derail people who are threatening lawsuits or exposés.
Too much testosterone all around, is my guess. Lord knows I've seen plenty of "volunteers" act as if the mere fact of their volunteering has given them some sort of entitlement, so I'm just very suspicious...
R. |
Yeah.. probably the guy said something stupid or acted like an ass with attitude.... My issue is that someone in a position of responsibility should be above that when discussing it after the fact as a third party especially in writing.
I bet the publicity no doubt did harm to the organisation.... and that could have been avoided with some common sense and calming of the waters on the directors part.... |
|
|
|
06/22/2011 10:42:33 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
LOL
I shot the whale. So shoot me.
|
I'll bake a cake with a file in it and arrange the jail break... |
|
|
|
06/22/2011 10:08:56 PM · #16 |
My gut feeling is that the volunteer responded like an ass when he was told to hand over the camera, and that the staff was out of patience with him. That doesn't excuse bad behavior, of course, ESPECIALLY not on the part of the director, via e-mail, BUT... As far as the threat of prosecution goes, that's a typical enough chest-thumping approach to try to derail people who are threatening lawsuits or exposés.
Too much testosterone all around, is my guess. Lord knows I've seen plenty of "volunteers" act as if the mere fact of their volunteering has given them some sort of entitlement, so I'm just very suspicious...
R. |
|
|
|
06/22/2011 09:59:19 PM · #17 |
Good points on both sides.
Or, in other words, everyone in this saga comes off smelling like the exhale from a whale's blowhole.
Yum, fermented fish and stuff in a fine mist.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2011 09:50:46 PM · #18 |
OK, so maybe the guy wasn't paying attention, or just decided the rules didn't apply to him.
-They still have pictures of the animals documenting their efforts on their website...photos that indeed required a camera, unless someone with some wicked good photoshop skills was involved.
-The laws cited are extremely unclear...it could also be interpreted as the group's own activities are in violation.
-In any event, violation of one law by the volunteer, does not, in any way justify the illegal confiscation of someone's property and the subsequent destruction of part of it.
-Then there's the response from the director in which he threatens the volunteer with felony charges unless he drops the matter.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Gotta love DPC lynch mobs. We're only hearing one side of the story here. We have no idea what really went on. But the director, in his response to Welch's e-mail, did have this to say:
"My staff is tired as they work very long hours here but that is no excuse. I do have to say that cameras around the whales are strictly prohibited, it is part of the briefing, it is on signs leading to the area where the whales are at and it is told to everyone beforehand when they schedule a shift that no cameras are allowed past the fence/tape barriers."
Do we have any particular reason to favor the "they never told me" version without even considering the "you must not have been paying attention at the briefing" version?
One thing I know for sure; the next time I'm in physical contact with stranded, multiple-ton, aquatic carnivores that are sloshing around in a couple feet of water, I'm not likely to be damn fool enough to reach for my camera and ask the beast to smile. Surely y'all can be objective enough to realize it makes damned good sense for the organization to keep its volunteers focused on the task at hand?
Admittedly some of the "reasons" given are nothing more than bullcrap smokescreens, but geeze... There're two sides to this story!
R. |
|
|
|
|
06/22/2011 09:38:41 PM · #19 |
| Bite the hand that feeds you comes to mind..... What an ass... and not the dude with the camera :shrug: |
|
|
|
06/22/2011 09:38:33 PM · #20 |
Gotta love DPC lynch mobs. We're only hearing one side of the story here. We have no idea what really went on. But the director, in his response to Welch's e-mail, did have this to say:
"My staff is tired as they work very long hours here but that is no excuse. I do have to say that cameras around the whales are strictly prohibited, it is part of the briefing, it is on signs leading to the area where the whales are at and it is told to everyone beforehand when they schedule a shift that no cameras are allowed past the fence/tape barriers."
Do we have any particular reason to favor the "they never told me" version without even considering the "you must not have been paying attention at the briefing" version?
One thing I know for sure; the next time I'm in physical contact with stranded, multiple-ton, aquatic carnivores that are sloshing around in a couple feet of water, I'm not likely to be damn fool enough to reach for my camera and ask the beast to smile. Surely y'all can be objective enough to realize it makes damned good sense for the organization to keep its volunteers focused on the task at hand?
Admittedly some of the "reasons" given are nothing more than bullcrap smokescreens, but geeze... There're two sides to this story!
R.
Message edited by author 2011-06-22 21:38:56. |
|
|
|
06/22/2011 09:23:24 PM · #21 |
That was the other thing that pissed me off about this... You have a director of a volunteer organization, an organization that obviously does a piss-poor job of informing its volunteers, implying the threat of felony charges for disobeying a rule that was never communicated in the first place.
Douchebaggery at its finest. |
|
|
|
06/22/2011 06:12:00 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by alohadave:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Sadly, actions such as this will only serve to seriously diminish the number of volunteers and the end results will be that the whales, while not suffering from the shock of being photographed, will end up dying on the beach. |
It will probably attract the same style nutbags that Greenpeace and PETA do. |
PETA is a great organization.....People Eating Tasty Animals has a fantastic moto..."All God's creatures have a place in life, right next to the potatoes and gravy!" (Runs and hides..LOL) |
|
|
|
06/22/2011 05:59:51 PM · #23 |
Perhaps being that close with a digital camera could bother a whale.
Being beached and having a hand on your fin, must pale in comparison. I gather the head of the organization would rather have it die and rot on the beach, than suffer the trauma of photography.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2011 05:54:59 PM · #24 |
The issue of proximity to marine mammals is real, and ought to be respected. When visiting the elephant seal mating and birthing grounds at Año Nuevo a twenty yard distance is required. One time when walking with a ranger we had the fun of being chased ( slowly) by a bored young bachelor who killed time by creeping up to groups to make them go any way he wanted. It seemed this was a game the ranger knew and the young bull enjoyed.
That said the part of the story that annoys me is the assumption that taking photographs is hazardous to the animals. In Mr. Welch's email he says that the supervisor that took his camera and deleted his images said " The “electronic pulses” from the camera probably causes massive damage to the whales and that I put their health at serious risk." Presumably these are the same pulses that ban using digital cameras from being used on a commercial airline flight, despite the fact that that no evidence has ever been proven to exist. Yes, whales hear things we cant, but the conservancy use other electronic around them that we know emit high frequencies and allow sanctioned photography. They would not allow such devices near the whales if they knew it to be harmfull.
Then the head of Marine Mammal Conservancy told Mr. Welch "by taking your camera in the water you are in violation of the Marine Mammal Protection Act and can be charged with a felony." The "no photography rule" is a Conservancy rule, and not a federal law. By coming close enough to help the stranded whales he was violating the letter of a federal law, but the notion that photographing a beached whale is going to harm it is silly. If "electronic pulses" were going to cause "massive damage" to a two thousand Kg whale, most of the people reading this would have been dead long ago. |
|
|
|
06/22/2011 05:50:57 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Sadly, actions such as this will only serve to seriously diminish the number of volunteers and the end results will be that the whales, while not suffering from the shock of being photographed, will end up dying on the beach. |
It will probably attract the same style nutbags that Greenpeace and PETA do. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/28/2024 03:22:56 AM EDT.
