Snow leopard documentary Question?

[pixieearth]

Hello, I am new to these forums, but really feel the need to ask a question...
I have just watched the Planet Earth documentary of the Snow Leopard, and was extremely moved by the film. However one thing really bothered me, during the tagging of the leopard, they clipped her ears with bright blue tags, surely this will interfer with her camouflage, and therefore hinder her hunting and possibly as a consequence her survival? I do not agree with intervention by science of nature to this extent, because simply by being observed, nature does not always act 'naturally' (if you know what I mean!). It is mans influence that has put many of the earth's species under threat, so surely biologists should understand this implicitly and therefore use un-intrusive methods of study. Please could someone explain why she had blue tags (infact, why she had tags at all) and not tags that blended with her natural colourings? I am completely at a loss to understand this. I also did not like the collar, too much technology, not enough empathy and understanding.

"The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them" Albert Einstein 1879-1955

Thanks, looking forward to hearing from anyone who can shed light on this one for me....or direct me to another place where I could find out.

[eeyore]

I presume that the ear tags are to identify her if she should happen to loose her collar, or if/when the battery goes flat. the bright colour is presumably so that they can be identified through a scope at a distance. ( I assume this is the case though of course i have never surveyed a snow leo so i could be wrong - Ive monitored fox populations like this tho , and stone curlew via colour rings and the principal is the same)

These were the same concerns that were expressed by the film maker , but they did eventually see her stalk and kill unimpeded by the technology.

On an empathetic level i can agree about the unsighltyness of the technology but the view expressed by the researcher in the film was that the data gathered through these surveys would add greatly to their understanding of the species and thus our ability to protect them - his argument was that slight discomfort for one leo was worth it if it helps to save the species.

The only point i really had a problem with was the use of leg hold snares to capture her in the first place - personally i would have used a cage trap , but i presume that the logistics of transporting one in that terrain were impractical.

[pixieearth]

Hi eeyore, and Blackbrook Eyes

wow, quick responses, thanks.
I suppose blue would be quite distinctive in the snow for tracking purposes, and I quess it does make sense on that level, although I still find it hard to believe that with technology as it is, more un-intrusive methods can't be employed, especially with a species so vulnerable that each individual's survival is so important (not saying that more prolific species aren't as important). I have to agree that leaving them alone is the best thing, although local knowledge and teaching the mountain communities about the leopard as part of their heritage is really important, and that is why I thought that the presenter (very bad with names!) was absolutely amazing and inspiring in what he was doing with the local communities and people.

Is a wire snare often used to catch animals for tagging/scientific study? I think it is distressing and horrendous, does the means ever justify the ends with such a device?

As for 'Stinking goats'...well I love goats, and to me they are just as lovely as the leopards, so I can't agree with Blackbrook eyes there, and I'm sure the farmers have a hard enough time as it is.

DO you know the name of the presenter and the camera man in the documentary, I missed the names (I'm useless with names), and was wanting to find out more information, as was utterly inspired.

Thankyou for getting back to me, it is good to have some understanding of the thoughts and reasons behind the action.

pixieearth

[Blackbrook Eye]

Hi pixieearth, welcome to WAB.
I also watched the programme with interest and got the same impressions as yourself. I assume that the brightly coloured tags are so that they can be easily seen by the observers in what can be extremely murky country, and for that reason would be easily seen by their prey. as for the collar, surely in this technolical age, a less conspicuous piece of kit is available.
The excuse that was made I believe went something like this ' The sacrifices made by the individual would benefit the species as a whole'. Surely, what would be of most benefit to the species as a whole would be to clear off and leave them alone, and get rid of the stinking goats that the 'farmers' of the region said they can't live off anyway, which would eradicate the predation problem that they were moaning about in the first place.
The thing that disturbed me most however, was the 'scientist' who was out catching the leopard, setting a wire snare for the purpose, surely this is bang out of order.

[Blackbrook Eye]

Sorry eeyore, I was typing my reply and didnt see yours until I had posted, never mind, its good to see that we agree on most aspects, Keith

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Blackbrook Eye

. Surely, what would be of most benefit to the species as a whole would be to clear off and leave them alone, and get rid of the stinking goats that the 'farmers' of the region said they can't live off anyway

thats true but impractical - as the film maker said at the end in the real world the future lies in educating the farmers to appreciate there heritage - alienating them wont help.

also we could educate the muppets in this country (and the west generally) who buy and wear (poached) snow leopard fur. I strongly believe in the roar of disaproval slogan - fur coats are worn by beautiful animals , and ugly people.

I once encountered a woman in costa coffee who was gassing to her equaly bimble brained freind about her new coat made of pure snow leopard fur - sample conversation " oh its so lovely and soft and nice, tamara - they must be beautiful animals"

I'm afraid that at this point i kind of lost it - informing them - and the whole shop that "it wasnt a beautiful animal any more you silly oooo , its a torn and butchered hunk of meat all so you can wear your ooooooo coat "- I then threw my drink over her and said coat and was subsequently ejected from the premises

[Blackbrook Eye]

Fancy wasting a good drink on a moron like her, I think I would have been thrown out with you in that instance, but for a bit more than throwing a drink !!!
So far as the farmers in the mountains are concerned, they were barely existing in the environment, if they were suffering so badly, surely they would be glad to move somewhere easier. I know of many people who have had to move to get a living and few have died from the experience.

[paulchandler6]

Originally Posted by eeyore

thats true but impractical - as the film maker said at the end in the real world the future lies in educating the farmers to appreciate there heritage - alienating them wont help.

also we could educate the muppets in this country (and the west generally) who buy and wear (poached) snow leopard fur. I strongly believe in the roar of disaproval slogan - fur coats are worn by beautiful animals , and ugly people.

I once encountered a woman in costa coffee who was gassing to her equaly bimble brained freind about her new coat made of pure snow leopard fur - sample conversation " oh its so lovely and soft and nice, tamara - they must be beautiful animals"

I'm afraid that at this point i kind of lost it - informing them - and the whole shop that "it wasnt a beautiful animal any more you silly oooo , its a torn and butchered hunk of meat all so you can wear your ooooooo coat "- I then threw my drink over her and said coat and was subsequently ejected from the premises

I echo your words here eeyore. Well done for your actions as well. I hope it made her realise what an idiot she is.

Paul

[galanthus]

I would have paid for your refill eeyore, mainly so that you could do it again, I would then take you off to nearest pub and buy you a pint of beer or glass of red

[galanthus]

... to drink yourself obviously

[naturelover]

Originally Posted by eeyore

thats true but impractical - as the film maker said at the end in the real world the future lies in educating the farmers to appreciate there heritage - alienating them wont help.

also we could educate the muppets in this country (and the west generally) who buy and wear (poached) snow leopard fur. I strongly believe in the roar of disaproval slogan - fur coats are worn by beautiful animals , and ugly people.

I once encountered a woman in costa coffee who was gassing to her equaly bimble brained freind about her new coat made of pure snow leopard fur - sample conversation " oh its so lovely and soft and nice, tamara - they must be beautiful animals"

I'm afraid that at this point i kind of lost it - informing them - and the whole shop that "it wasnt a beautiful animal any more you silly oooo , its a torn and butchered hunk of meat all so you can wear your ooooooo coat "- I then threw my drink over her and said coat and was subsequently ejected from the premises

eeyore i love your style and guts to what you did to that woman in the fure coat,you did what alot of us would love to do,i am a big cat lover any way good on ya,xx.

[tachybaptus]

Hi - although I agree that the tags were quite obvious I believe that most mammals have very limited colour vision and so the tags would not have been as obvious to mammalian prey as they were to us.

However, the collar was a bit of a dinosaur and the leg snare was not ideal - neither were a good advert for scientific study.

[Ukwildlifeo]

The point is that we next to nothing about snow leopards so this tagging is nessacary. You cant save a species if you don't know anything about them. Its exactly the same as the great work done by the BTO and similar groups ringing birds, without which we would have no idea where birds migrate to and from

[m1.carson]

Hi,

With the snares, it's the same as the shepherds now, they use a crook, a neck catcher, where some used to use a leg cleek, but the cleek sometimes broke the sheeps leg.

How should you catch a wild animal, darts, traps or nets, difficult decision.

eeyore,

It seems a terrible shame that very old fur coats, I'm now talking 30's 50's have to be destroyed because people are afraid to wear them, abuse, arson to charity shops etc.,I'm talking about the years when the animals were thought to be plentifull, that seems to me to be even more of a waste of their lives to throw their coats in the bin.

Max.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by m1.carson

eeyore,

It seems a terrible shame that very old fur coats, I'm now talking 30's 50's have to be destroyed because people are afraid to wear them, abuse, arson to charity shops etc.,I'm talking about the years when the animals were thought to be plentifull, that seems to me to be even more of a waste of their lives to throw their coats in the bin.

Max.

to my mind it is never okay to wear fur as a fashion statement - the fur trade in those years being one of the reasons that the aninmals that were plentiful are not now.

i'd also point out that the numptie in my example was wearing a new coat - bought according to her vacuous conversation over the tinterweb from the states.

those who have fur coats to "dispose" of could always give them to a disaster relief charity where they can be redistributed to those who have lost everything and have a genuine need of warm clothing.

[Mumby]

Does anybody know if the snow leopards in this documentary are the same ones featured in this month's BBC Wildlife magazine?

The author of the article, Jeff Wilson, mentions that he saw snow leopards that had been given radio collars and discussed the pros and cons.

Well worth a read if you can find it.

Regards,

Paul

[m1.carson]

Hi eeyore,

Yep you're quite right about donating them to disaster relief, unfortunately I think you'll find that the charity shops have been ordered not to stock/save them at all as more than one shop has suffered from arson or paint attacks.

The coats go into rag bags which are then collected by a designated company, and are disposed of by them, any collected materials such as blankets,coats etc. are not sent to the country concerned, but are sold as rags and the money then used to buy local produce in that country boosting the local economy, it's too expensive to ship the goods out there.

Just noticed your "disposed of" as in "no longer wanted, get a new one", sadly not the case, a lot of the donations are from clearing out.

Max.

[DaiTheDragon]

I should think the Blue tags are for visual identification. I remember the Red Kites at Grigin were all colour tagged. As regards the collar I agree that it is possible to make one that is less obtrusive but it depends on how the project is funded, a more advanced collar would cost a lot of money.
The farmers are entitled to scrape a living and no one should be forced to move, a compromise is a much better solution.
eeyore, while I agree with you that the fur trade is wrong, I also think it is wrong for you to force your views on someone in such a dramatic fashion. If you were a vegitarian would you throw a drink over someone eating meat. To be honest if I had been the woman I would have called the police and then you would have ended up in a non fur court.

Dai

[coasty]

I did see the documentary , I echo those thoughts that worry about the compromising of the camouflage and the initial method of trapping. However if the actions taken are helping to preserve this species then they must be done.. Because surely there is no more beautiful and majestic creature than this and the idea they could become extent is horrific,,, Oh yes and WELL DONE EEYORE.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

eeyore, while I agree with you that the fur trade is wrong, I also think it is wrong for you to force your views on someone in such a dramatic fashion. If you were a vegitarian would you throw a drink over someone eating meat. To be honest if I had been the woman I would have called the police and then you would have ended up in a non fur court.

Dai

you are quite correct dai - i generally oppose direct action for precicely this reason , and also because it makes campaigners look like extremists - however i lost my temper on this occasion and acted in an intemperate manner - it seems that even i am not quite perfect.

That said to clarify it wasnt just that she was wearing fur that got my blood boiling , but her bimble brained speech about what lovely animals they must be to have such soft fur and how it was a real shame that there arent more left

[JeffH]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

.......To be honest if I had been the woman I would have called the police and then you would have ended up in a non fur court. Dai

.....and when the police arrived Pete (Eeyore) would have had to say "it's a fur cop Guv"

As far as I'm concerned, good on ya Pete - there are times when a bit of direct (albeit illegal) action seems the most appropriate response and, on a more profound note, as an old and well-respected lawyer once said to me - "I'm afraid there are occasions when in order to achieve justice one has to step outside the law"

Jeff

[DaiTheDragon]

So if someone comes along and runs a key along the side of your car because they think yor car isn't green enough, you catch them at it and ask them what the heck they are doing, it's OK if their response is "it seems like an appropriate thing to do". And of course you are going to say, oh thats OK then your just making your point.

Just because you have strong beliefs in something it does not give you the right to break the law.
I think all the people who commended Pete on his actions are hypocrit's because if someone did a simailar thing to them I don't think you would be so forgiving.

Dai

[JeffH]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

.....Just because you have strong beliefs in something it does not give you the right to break the law.
I think all the people who commended Pete on his actions are hypocrit's because if someone did a simailar thing to them I don't think you would be so forgiving. Dai

Dai, so you've never broken a single law eh - eg speeding? Remember this - if many of the laws of the past had not been broken by people of principle we wouldn't enjoy the freedoms we have today

Jeff

[coasty]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

Just because you have strong beliefs in something it does not give you the right to break the law.
I think all the people who commended Pete on his actions are hypocrit's because if someone did a simailar thing to them I don't think you would be so forgiving.

Dai

Hypocritical ,,yes quite probably,,,Clear conscience definately,,,,

[Kayleigh]

Originally Posted by coasty

Hypocritical ,,yes quite probably,,,Clear conscience definately,,,,

I second that.