Kingfisher Diary (with photos)

[JeffH]

Originally Posted by richardkm

Wow, great photos.

Just one point, I believe it's illegal to photograph kingfishers at or near the nest without a licence, although I could be out of date on this. If I am right, it should be okay around your pond, but not if you follow them to where they are nesting, but I would guess its a moot point if they are nesting within sight of a public right of way!

Thanks for raising this point Richard - in fact, it's something I was going to comment on in my next report (as since starting this thread it's occurred to me that others might share your concern), but as you've raised it I'll deal with it now.

You're certainly not out of date on the point, but you're not absolutely correct on the technicalities either - let me explain:-

Strictly speaking, it isn't the act of photographing Kingfishers at or near the nest that is illegal and requires a licence, it's intentionally disturbing one (or any other wild bird listed in Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 - as amended by the Environmental Protection Act 1990) "...while it is building a nest or is in, on or near a nest containing eggs or young; or disturbing dependent young of such a bird..." and irrespective of whether the act of disturbance is for photography or some other purpose.

Having said that, the licensing provisions featuring within the legislation do give Natural England (formerly English Nature), as "the appropriate authority", the power to grant licences to disturb Schedule 1 protected species for the purpose of photography and for a number of other purposes.

So, in short, it is intentional disturbance that is illegal rather than photography per se (sorry, I can feel myself slipping into lawyer mode ), though clearly if one is found to have disturbed a Schedule 1 protected bird for the purpose of photography and without a licence to do so, that would indeed be an offence.

Thankfully all of that is somewhat academic as I'm pleased to say that I do have a Schedule 1 licence relating to these birds and this specific site. Obtaining such a licence is quite a rigmarole (even for a lawyer ) but I'm grateful for the help and advice given to me by the staff of Natural England's Licensing Service and for the speed with which they processed my licence application.

I'm also indebted to the landowner (although close to my home, the area of water at the centre of the Kingfishers territory is on private land) who not only gave me his enthusiastic consent to observe and photograph the birds but also invited me to erect a temporary hide on the site I have since done this - over a period of several days so as not to disturb the birds too much in one go, but in fact as I was knocking in the corner posts on the 1st day one of them sat and watched me from a nearby tree!!! I'm almost convinced it recognises me as that fool who keeps re-stocking his garden ponds with small fish as a kind of Kingfisher take-away service

Now for the real news, the pair have started nestbuilding in earnest with each of them taking it in turns to spend 20 minutes or so tunnelling whilst the other watches from the opposite bank or goes off to do a spot of fishing. After each digging session they emerge with muddy beaks and then do 2 or 3 quick shallow dips into the water to cleanse themselves - it's quite amusing to watch. Here's a couple of photos showing both the male and the female with muddy beaks.





and finally - after all that work they still have the time and energy to do what comes naturally

[Ollie]

Well Jeff you have surpassed all my expectations in every aspect with your brilliant reports and photographs. Particularly the mating shot, A photo that I cannot praise highly enough. Well done and please keep the reports and photos coming.
Roger

[jennyb]

Wow. These pictures get better and better!

Jenny

[vinnychameleon]

Well done mate . This makes great reading . Yet again you are so lucky to have them so close to your house. Your not thinking of selling are u .

[Rookie 300d]

Jeff, I have just noticed in the Gallery that these shots had been taken with a 1.4 convertor. Was this using MF or AF? (I am very interested to see if a 1.4 is worth an investment?)

[John]

Originally Posted by Ollie

Well Jeff you have surpassed all my expectations in every aspect with your brilliant reports and photographs. Particularly the mating shot, A photo that I cannot praise highly enough. Well done and please keep the reports and photos coming.
Roger

Absolutely.

This is a brilliant set of photos and the whole thread has to be one of the best, if not the best, diary style threads ever to be on WAB.

John

[JeffH]

Thank you all once again for your generous praise of my photos and reports - I'm overwhelmed by your kind remarks.

As my stats show I'm not a very prolific poster, but since joining the WAB community some 9 months ago I've always viewed the site as a great way of seeking and sharing wildlife-related information with a friendly and like-minded group of people. A great many WAB members (far too many to mention individually) have been very helpful to me on a whole range of subjects from choosing a camera, lenses and other equipment to identifying fungi, insects, etc and I'm delighted to be able to give something back to the site in the form of this increasingly popular diary thread.

As smartie said much earlier in the thread "this could run and run" and I'll certainly carry it on throughout the nesting season and hopefully be able to share many more photos and tales of these Kingfishers' activities with you all.

Jeff

Originally Posted by Rookie 300d

Jeff, I have just noticed in the Gallery that these shots had been taken with a 1.4 convertor. Was this using MF or AF? (I am very interested to see if a 1.4 is worth an investment?)

Rookie, in answer to your question - I've used both MF & AF but all the shots linked to this thread were using AF. As you may know (and contrary to the manufacturer's official line), it's possible to maintain AF with Canon's lenses/teleconverter by taping over 3 of the pins - I can't remember who first put me onto this but Boddie has a very useful photo/description of the technique on his own website.

I chose to invest in a 1.4 converter (and certainly haven't regretted it) after seeing the high quality results John achieves with his. Incidentally, I'm assuming you're a Canon user but whatever your camera preference I'm told it's important to match your choice of converter with your lens(es) - ie. Canon for Canon, Nikon for Nikon, etc, as I've seen various reports of poor results with cheaper unmatched converters. There's probably been a thread about this in the Photographic section but, if not, why not start one and I'm sure the real camera wizards will be only too pleased to offer all the help/advice you need.

Jeff

[John]

Originally Posted by Rookie 300d

Jeff, I have just noticed in the Gallery that these shots had been taken with a 1.4 convertor. Was this using MF or AF? (I am very interested to see if a 1.4 is worth an investment?)

Hi Rookie

I use the canon 1.4 converter coupled with my 30D and 100-400 IS USM lens and I think it was a remarkable purchase. I never take it off now (except on very few occasions). Virtually every DSLR photo I have taken has had the 1.4 attached.

For me personally I highly recommend it.

John

[JeffH]

APRIL FOOL'S DAY UPDATE

Here's a couple of photos from this morning's Kingfisher observations:-



OK, not that funny I know . Here's one of the real thing and I hope to post a proper update/report (with some more photos) later today -



Jeff

[buzfuz8149]

Loved all the photos and reports - really glad you are sharing these wonderful shots with us.

Carol.