Approaching wildlife?

[Paint Rock Drones]

I've seen a number of nice wildlife videos posted recently. But it seem that in most cases where there are birds involved, they start of stationary in the frame and then most if not all fly away during the shot. That makes for a nice clip, but I fear that we may be harassing the wildlife in the pursuit of capturing them on video. I've seen posts saying that the best practice is to fly keeping separation through altitude or distance while recording, but if the birds are always flying away, wouldn't that suggest that many people aren't following this advice? Or are folks taking lots of video and only posting when the birds happen to take off?

 

[thispilothere]

That makes for a nice clip, but I fear that we may be harassing the wildlife in the pursuit of capturing them on video.

I don't really care if birds are a little freaked out by my drone. What's next? Do I need to stop riding my jetski because I might be harassing the fish?

I've seen posts saying that the best practice is to fly keeping separation through altitude or distance while recording

A. Keeping "separation" is kinda nebulous. Is it 1 foot, 100 feet, more?

B. "Best practices" are just rules some dude made up. That dude doesn't know any better than we do. If those rules make a lot of sense to me, I'll follow them, if not, I'll ignore them. I've seen a youtube video claiming we need to avoid trees because the tree might be traumatized by a drone. I'm ignoring his "best practice" and would continue to ignore it even if he was head of the FAA and it became law.

 

[Gringorio]

I don't really care if birds are a little freaked out by my drone. What's next? Do I need to stop riding my jetski because I might be harassing the fish?


A. Keeping "separation" is kinda nebulous. Is it 1 foot, 100 feet, more?

B. "Best practices" are just rules some dude made up. That dude doesn't know any better than we do. If those rules make a lot of sense to me, I'll follow them, if not, I'll ignore them. I've seen a youtube video claiming we need to avoid trees because the tree might be traumatized by a drone. I'm ignoring his "best practice" and would continue to ignore it even if he was head of the FAA and it became law.

Don't be like this "pilot" here. Rather, respect wildlife. They are actually working hard to make a living. If your drone flight causes wildlife to change behavior and expend energy, like causing birds to fly, then yes, it's harassment. They can't just go to a 7-Eleven and buy another energy drink to make it through the night.

 

[zeusfl]

What is the difference from a photographer approaching close to a bird trying to take a close up and the bird fly away scared from flying away because of a drone? I cant understand the logic.

 

[MS Coast]

I don't really care if birds are a little freaked out by my drone. What's next? Do I need to stop riding my jetski because I might be harassing the fish?


A. Keeping "separation" is kinda nebulous. Is it 1 foot, 100 feet, more?

B. "Best practices" are just rules some dude made up. That dude doesn't know any better than we do. If those rules make a lot of sense to me, I'll follow them, if not, I'll ignore them. I've seen a youtube video claiming we need to avoid trees because the tree might be traumatized by a drone. I'm ignoring his "best practice" and would continue to ignore it even if he was head of the FAA and it became law.

• "Best practices" are just rules some dude made up.
• That dude doesn't know any better than we do.
• If those rules make a lot of sense to me, I'll follow them, if not, I'll ignore them.
• I've seen a youtube video claiming we need to avoid trees because the tree might be traumatized by a drone.
• I'm ignoring his "best practice" and would continue to ignore it even if he was head of the FAA and it became law

Wow. Just wow.

 

[Meta4]

What is the difference from a photographer approaching close to a bird trying to take a close up and the bird fly away scared from flying away because of a drone? I cant understand the logic.

There's a very big difference.
A photographer approaching a bird will be quiet and won't be using a very wideangle lens that makes it necessary to get within a few feet for the bird to appear a reasonable size in the frame.
But drones are aggressively noisy and have wideangle lenses so drone flyers trying to photograph birds have to get unreasonably close before they have anything recognisable.
Drones are about the worst possible way to photograph most wildlife.

 

[DoomMeister]

There's a very big difference.
A photographer approaching a bird will be quiet and won't be using a very wideangle lens that makes it necessary to get within a few feet for the bird to appear a reasonable size in the frame.
But drones are aggressively noisy and have wideangle lenses so drone flyers trying to photograph birds have to get unreasonably close before they have anything recognisable.
Drones are about the worst possible way to photograph most wildlife.

Just adding a bit to what @Meta4 was saying about the wide angle lenses. Their use in photography/videography is for scenic vistas, or capturing an indoor space without panning and joining shots together, or extended depth of field where both very close and distant objects are in focus. That is why most wildlife photographers use telephoto lenses.

 

[akdrone]

Most people greatly underestimate the difficulty of staying alive for some species. It's understandable. While it's perfectly true that some animals have a relatively easy living in terms of having plenty of food, it's more often the case that individuals are competing with each other for limited resources and many are living at the edge. It might be the young, the old or the infirm but you'll not know it by your lens. When people disturb them and cause them to run, fly away or evade, that causes them to burn calories that some can ill afford. If I'm causing a pigeon downtown to burn calories, truth be told I don't care all that much but I'd be very much more concerned if I were causing a migrating bird to leave a perch or an elk to run away from me. Running 50 yards once in their life probably isn't a deciding factor but multiply my interaction with 20 hunters and 15 other drone pilots and at some point it does become an issue. I am greatly disappointed in a lot of what I consider shortcomings of the Mavic 3 but I am buying it because, in part, it has a telephoto lens (crippled) and is so much more quiet than my FPV. You do watcha gonna do, but for my part I am going to always try to balance my desire for an image with the reality of a wild animal's struggle for existence.

 

[zeusfl]

I do wild life photography but the Mavic 3 changed the game for me. I procure not to disturb the animals the best I can. Again I personally believe that In person I disturbe more than with the drone. But that’s me. I approach very gentil non aggressive.

 

[akdrone]

I do wild life photography but the Mavic 3 changed the game for me. I procure not to disturb the animals the best I can. Again I personally believe that In person I disturbe more than with the drone. But that’s me. I approach very gentil non aggressive.

Congrats on that film. Impressive

 

[zeusfl]

I guess the beauty and art is make the photo or firm doing normal stuff like nobody is looking or distressing. That is my goal. Like the bird in the film looking for a fish.

 

[BigAl07]

I don't really care if birds are a little freaked out by my drone. What's next? Do I need to stop riding my jetski because I might be harassing the fish?


A. Keeping "separation" is kinda nebulous. Is it 1 foot, 100 feet, more?

B. "Best practices" are just rules some dude made up. That dude doesn't know any better than we do. If those rules make a lot of sense to me, I'll follow them, if not, I'll ignore them. I've seen a youtube video claiming we need to avoid trees because the tree might be traumatized by a drone. I'm ignoring his "best practice" and would continue to ignore it even if he was head of the FAA and it became law.

Seriously? You pic and chose which to follow due to how much or little they affect what you want to do. That's very Narcissistic of you and VERY detrimental to our industry as a whole. The very LAST thing we need is Nature Lovers going off on UAS operators because they usually congregate in great #'s and tend to be able to entice people to give great $$ for their "cause". US operators have enough of a bad stigma without you attempting to make it worse for your own satisfaction.

On this topic we use the "loose" rule that if our actions cause the animal to change it's actions (in any way) we are disturbing them. Notice I didn't say harassing as that would be if we continued to follow/disturb the animals.

Sometimes we should do the RIGHT thing even if there isn't a written law against it. Just because we CAN do something doesn't mean we SHOULD!!

 

[Deleted member 137163]

• "Best practices" are just rules some dude made up.
• That dude doesn't know any better than we do.
• If those rules make a lot of sense to me, I'll follow them, if not, I'll ignore them.
• I've seen a youtube video claiming we need to avoid trees because the tree might be traumatized by a drone.
• I'm ignoring his "best practice" and would continue to ignore it even if he was head of the FAA and it became law

Wow. Just wow.

Wow, just wow, just just wow! Glad I will never visit LA!

 

[zeusfl]

I agree that most to be a limit. Having the Mavic 3 helps us keep a good distance without distracting or molesting the wildlife.

Normally I used to use my M2P and crop the video or picture to get a better look but again the zoom helps tremendously.

 

[Gagey52]

I just wish they'd stop photo bombing my work. Found this fellow in one of my othos.

 

[tibadoe]

I don't really care if birds are a little freaked out by my drone. What's next? Do I need to stop riding my jetski because I might be harassing the fish?


A. Keeping "separation" is kinda nebulous. Is it 1 foot, 100 feet, more?

B. "Best practices" are just rules some dude made up. That dude doesn't know any better than we do. If those rules make a lot of sense to me, I'll follow them, if not, I'll ignore them. I've seen a youtube video claiming we need to avoid trees because the tree might be traumatized by a drone. I'm ignoring his "best practice" and would continue to ignore it even if he was head of the FAA and it became law.

And some wonder why more and more laws/no fly zones against drone pilots are popping up all over.

 

[Bob Mc]

I’m a professional wildlife photographer. One of the first things I learned about wildlife is you get the best pictures if you understand their behavior, approaching slowly until you notice their increased nervousness then back off, birds will usually squat down just before lift off, mammals also. Pictures of wildlife flying/running away doesn’t show much. Study the animals behavior and get in position before they arrive. It takes a lot of patience. Good luck.

 

[tlswift58]

Seriously? You pic and chose which to follow due to how much or little they affect what you want to do. That's very Narcissistic of you and VERY detrimental to our industry as a whole. The very LAST thing we need is Nature Lovers going off on UAS operators because they usually congregate in great #'s and tend to be able to entice people to give great $$ for their "cause". US operators have enough of a bad stigma without you attempting to make it worse for your own satisfaction.

On this topic we use the "loose" rule that if our actions cause the animal to change it's actions (in any way) we are disturbing them. Notice I didn't say harassing as that would be if we continued to follow/disturb the animals.

Sometimes we should do the RIGHT thing even if there isn't a written law against it. Just because we CAN do something doesn't mean we SHOULD!!

Seem to see more and more of this "attitude," which is not good for the drone community.

That's why drones are not allowed over "wilderness" areas esp to keep the wildlife safe from some cowboy hot on the behind of some deer, bird, etc for that great video / picture.

Drones that now have zoom capability - some in video only - can reasonably video wildlife from afar while seemingly close - just like photographers using super telephoto lens to get up close shots of bears, deer, elk, etc in THEIR NATURAL HABITAT.

I'd love to personally watch a photographer with a wide angle lens get a close up of a bear with cubs, bison, etc for the show of them getting mauled for being STUPID in the first place. Living near and visiting many National Parks - see this craziness very frequently esp people with cell phones and wanting that selfie with that cute bear, elk, deer, etc.

It's overall called RESPECT, a word so many seem to not know or grasp. Respecting wildlife and doing the least amount of harm to them is what everyone should be doing. Sometimes the animal is the one that gets the "death penalty" for a stupid humans actions, when it should be the other way around.

 

[NG Wildman]

Seriously? You pic and chose which to follow due to how much or little they affect what you want to do. That's very Narcissistic of you and VERY detrimental to our industry as a whole. The very LAST thing we need is Nature Lovers going off on UAS operators because they usually congregate in great #'s and tend to be able to entice people to give great $$ for their "cause". US operators have enough of a bad stigma without you attempting to make it worse for your own satisfaction.

On this topic we use the "loose" rule that if our actions cause the animal to change it's actions (in any way) we are disturbing them. Notice I didn't say harassing as that would be if we continued to follow/disturb the animals.

Sometimes we should do the RIGHT thing even if there isn't a written law against it. Just because we CAN do something doesn't mean we SHOULD!!

This is called INTEGRITY.

 

[simsurf]

I don't really care if birds are a little freaked out by my drone. What's next? Do I need to stop riding my jetski because I might be harassing the fish?


A. Keeping "separation" is kinda nebulous. Is it 1 foot, 100 feet, more?

B. "Best practices" are just rules some dude made up. That dude doesn't know any better than we do. If those rules make a lot of sense to me, I'll follow them, if not, I'll ignore them. I've seen a youtube video claiming we need to avoid trees because the tree might be traumatized by a drone. I'm ignoring his "best practice" and would continue to ignore it even if he was head of the FAA and it became law.

It may also be illegal for threatened species under relevant legislation and if I saw you doing I would report you in a heartbeat.