Remote IR Cameras & the law?

[OckViewer]

I've been fortunate enough to discover what I think is a badger sett and have found otter spraints near where I live. They seem ideal for trying to record using a remote camera.
The otter is fond of going under a bridge where a small river flows. Unfortunately, judging by the graffiti, the same bridge is popular with local disfranchised youths.
If I was to put a camera under the bridge there is the obvious risk of vandelism or theft.
But are there any legal issues of putting a camera in a public place and then putting the film on the internet? - even if it does not show the aforementioned youths

Thanks in advance

Richard

[Lancashire Lad]

As I understand things, There is currently no law against photography, or "presumption of privacy" for any person, in a genuinely public place.

You would have to avoid falling foul of restrictions for designated areas, or private property, or of the possibility of stop/search under the premise of section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. - Or probably more likely, the wrath of the youths of whom you mention.

These House of Commons links to this recently debated issue may be of help: -

Hansard Text: - House of Commons Hansard Debates for 01 Apr 2009 (pt 0004)
Audiovisual version of same debate: - Player

Regards,
Mike.

[kenny243]

Originally Posted by OckViewer

I've been fortunate enough to discover what I think is a badger sett and have found otter spraints near where I live. They seem ideal for trying to record using a remote camera.
The otter is fond of going under a bridge where a small river flows. Unfortunately, judging by the graffiti, the same bridge is popular with local disfranchised youths.
If I was to put a camera under the bridge there is the obvious risk of vandelism or theft.
But are there any legal issues of putting a camera in a public place and then putting the film on the internet? - even if it does not show the aforementioned youths

Thanks in advance

Richard

Hi OckViewer,
I work for the North East Wildlife Trusts, and we've been setting cameras in various locations, including areas such as you describe, for the past year. As far as I'm aware, there is no law preventing this, provided you have permission from the landowner, and you are not intending to film members of the public without their consent.
Two of my colleagues have had cameras stolen by the way.
Some of our videos and photos can be seen at:Home - A WebsiteBuilder Website

Kenny243

[JeffH]

Originally Posted by OckViewer

I've been fortunate enough to discover what I think is a badger sett and have found otter spraints near where I live. They seem ideal for trying to record using a remote camera.......Richard

It's perhaps worth mentioning that the use of a remote camera (or any other form of photography) at or in the immediate vicinity of an active badger sett may constitute 'disturbance' and therefore be illegal - see here for Natural England's current views on what is meant by 'disturbance' in this context -
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Ima...tcm6-11814.pdf

As you may have seen/read on another recent thread on here, it is thought that badgers can see infra red light and are disturbed by it so that the use of IR remote cameras or night vision viewing devices near their setts is problematical.

I should perhaps add that I am currently involved in a project of photographing a clan of badgers but that all the photography is taking place well away from their sett.

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers, Barn Owls & Avocets)

[Stinky Bob]

You may, if you plan on fixing the camera to the bridge have to get the okay from your local council, assuming that they are responsible for the maintenance of it.

[OckViewer]

Thanks for the replies.

Regarding the badgers, I was thinking of placing it by suspected bader paths rather than the sett itself. Which, if I am correct, would be inaccessible anyway.

As for the bridge, it is under a main road and an inspection this evening I don't think there are any suitable places to put a camera without it being obivious.

So it may be a while before I invest in something, but I will continue to follow the discussions, especially about IR & Badgers

[kenny243]

Originally Posted by JeffH

It's perhaps worth mentioning that the use of a remote camera (or any other form of photography) at or in the immediate vicinity of an active badger sett may constitute 'disturbance' and therefore be illegal - see here for Natural England's current views on what is meant by 'disturbance' in this context -
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Ima...tcm6-11814.pdf

As you may have seen/read on another recent thread on here, it is thought that badgers can see infra red light and are disturbed by it so that the use of IR remote cameras or night vision viewing devices near their setts is problematical.

I should perhaps add that I am currently involved in a project of photographing a clan of badgers but that all the photography is taking place well away from their sett.

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers, Barn Owls & Avocets)

Hi Jeff,
I regularly use a variety of infra red cameras and night vision devices, both professionally and personally, and most of the cameras on the market use a light which is visible to some degree. Very few animals are disturbed by the light, and many are curious about it, I have video of Badgers, Otters, and Roe actually sniffing and pushing at the cameras. I've found that the noise, however slight, from the camera seems to be noticed more.
(The only camera which I'm aware of that has a totally invisible flash, is the rconyx. Yukon ranger night vision has invisible infra red too, and I've not seen any animal that's appeared to notice when they're watched through this system.)
It's a good point you make about disturbance, no video or photo is worth causing alarm or disturbance to an animal, and care should always be taken when selecting locations for filming.

Kenny

[JeffH]

Originally Posted by kenny243

Hi Jeff,
I regularly use a variety of infra red cameras and night vision devices, both professionally and personally, and most of the cameras on the market use a light which is visible to some degree. Very few animals are disturbed by the light, and many are curious about it, I have video of Badgers, Otters, and Roe actually sniffing and pushing at the cameras. I've found that the noise, however slight, from the camera seems to be noticed more.
(The only camera which I'm aware of that has a totally invisible flash, is the rconyx. Yukon ranger night vision has invisible infra red too, and I've not seen any animal that's appeared to notice when they're watched through this system.)
It's a good point you make about disturbance, no video or photo is worth causing alarm or disturbance to an animal, and care should always be taken when selecting locations for filming. Kenny

Thanks for the info Kenny. I've no personal experience of using (or indeed any need for) infra red cameras and my experience of night vision devices is very limited. However, when I first started my current badger project I did quite a bit of research on these matters and spoke/communicated with several people who had found that badgers (or at least some badgers) did indeed seem disturbed by infra red/night vision devices, though whether the disturbance was the result of light or sound is/was unknown.

I suspect that the degree of disturbance/curiosity will vary significantly from clan to clan and that the extent to which the badgers are exposed to human activity, light pollution, etc will influence their reactions, so that the more 'street-wise' clans will presumably be less disturbed/curious than the rural/country clans such as the one I'm working with - just a thought

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers, Barn Owls and Avocets)

[kenny243]

Originally Posted by JeffH

Thanks for the info Kenny. I've no personal experience of using (or indeed any need for) infra red cameras and my experience of night vision devices is very limited. However, when I first started my current badger project I did quite a bit of research on these matters and spoke/communicated with several people who had found that badgers (or at least some badgers) did indeed seem disturbed by infra red/night vision devices, though whether the disturbance was the result of light or sound is/was unknown.

I suspect that the degree of disturbance/curiosity will vary significantly from clan to clan and that the extent to which the badgers are exposed to human activity, light pollution, etc will influence their reactions, so that the more 'street-wise' clans will presumably be less disturbed/curious than the rural/country clans such as the one I'm working with - just a thought

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers, Barn Owls and Avocets)

I think you're spot on regarding how reactions differ. I lean towards thinking that the sound from cameras causes more concern than the IR light. I've recently got videos of a Roe Buck sniffing at the camera, and a Stoat standing on tip toe looking up at a camera, both in daylight when the IR wasn't on.This could be just the the smell of the camera but who Knows?

Kenny