Photographing young kingfishers?

[Lucio]

Hi there,

I was wondering if it would be possible (legal) to photograph a young kingfisher (already fledged, obviously) having any kind of interaction with its parent(s) if this kind of activity were to happen away from a nest site, without a schedule 1 licence. I am thinking ahead a few months here, as there is currently a kingfisher along my local stretch of river (I don't know if he/she has a nest or will do, and even if he/she did, I am sure that it would be a good distance from where I would be likely to encounter him/her, as this kingfisher's appearence is only ever fleeting and rare at 'my' point of the river.) I am simply inquiring about this case on principle and just in case this sort of opportunity were to arise, as I would hate to cause any kind of stress or disturbance to any kingfishers, or any animal, for that matter, and would certainly like to stay within the law.

Thanks,

Lucio.

[JeffH]

Hi Lucio

The point you raise is a good one and something which probably wouldn't even occur to many older (I nearly said 'more mature' - but that may not always be the case ) wildlife photographers.

To answer your question we need to look at the wording of the actual legislation concerned - the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended by subsequent legislation. Here's an extract from Part 1 of the Act (as it currently stands and taking account of later amendments) -

"Subject to the provisions of this Part, if any person intentionally or recklessly—
(a) disturbs any wild bird included in Schedule 1 while it is building a nest or is in, on or near a nest containing eggs or young; or
(b) disturbs dependent young of such a bird,
he shall be guilty of an offence ....."

Sub-section (b) - which I've shown in bold - seems to cover the situation you have in mind and, in the absence of any mention of the nest, clearly applies wherever the disturbance takes place.

As you may know, fledgling Kingfishers typically stay with their parents for only a few days after leaving the nest during which time the parents continue to feed them whilst also trying to teach them the skill of catching fish. After those few days the parent birds drive their youngsters away.

Therefore the only interaction you are likely to see between the parent birds and their young will probably be within this short period of dependency and, as such, will be covered by part (b) above and will require a Schedule 1 Licence in order for you to photograph it and be sure of staying within the law.

I hope that helps

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

[BillyPilgrim]

Looks like the key word is 'Disturbs' so you can photograph any bird you like as long as you don't disturb it.

I'd try putting up/finding a perch, sitting quiet, keeping still and if a bird lands on your perch then take some photos. In my experience Kingfishers don't mind a bit of noise as long as you don't make any sudden movements.

[JeffH]

Originally Posted by BillyPilgrim

Looks like the key word is 'Disturbs'..........

That's absolutely right Billy, but of course "disturbance" shouldn't be interpreted too narrowly.

For instance, here's an extract from Natural England's guidance as to what constitutes "disturbance" in relation to Badger setts -

"The Act does not define either interference or disturbance and we are not aware of any case law on the meaning...... We therefore have to
rely on the ordinary everyday meaning of the words. The Oxford English
Dictionary defines “to disturb” as:
• To agitate and destroy (quiet etc);
• To break up the quiet, tranquillity;
• To stir up, trouble, disquiet, to agitate; to unsettle;
• To agitate mentally;
• To interfere with the settled course of operations"

and so attempting to photograph any Schedule 1 bird or other specially protected creature in the circumstances covered by the legislation, without a licence and with at least the risk of 'unsettling' it can be a fairly high-risk strategy

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

[Lucio]

Thanks for the clarification, but I'm still slightly unclear about what Natural England's definition of 'disturb' is??? Does it mean that photographing a young bird like this is completely out of the question, or is it just without 'disturbance,' i.e. could one photograph this behavior if it were to occur whilst a photographer was completely hidden in a hide, which had been accepted by the kingfishers, and they were on a regularly used perch of theirs??? I'm confused !!!

Lucio.

P.S. The act states that one may not 'disturb' a schedule 1 bird (a kingfisher in this case) "while it is building a nest or is in, on or near a nest containing eggs or young," so would it be OK to photograph courtship behavior before either or both of the kingfishers has started to build a nest ? Many thanks.

[Lucio]

Anyone???

[pressld2]

Hi Lucio,

I suspect that the reason for the lack of replies is that no one really knows yet.

What usually happens is that the Government passes laws and then the courts interpret them. So things like exactly what is meant by "disturb" in the context of the Wildlife and Countryside Act will only be known once some successful prosecutions have been brought and we will then have the judgements from those cases to guide us. If parliament doesn't like the interpretation of the courts then it has to go back and amend the legislation to make it's original intent clearer.

But as JeffH mentioned in his quote from Natural England there is no case law yet so we're all still a bit in the dark. This being the case I would advise erring on the side of caution. Your best bet would be to work towards becoming licensed like Jeff. To do this you will first have to demonstrate that you have the necessary knowledge and skills to be able to photograph non-schedule 1 birds without disturbance. And doing that will provide a huge boost to your knowledge of wildlife, fieldcraft and photography - you can't lose!

Dave P.

[RoyW]

Apart from anything else, people often do not like seeing photographers near to breeding birds and often (rightly or wrongly) jump to the conclusion that the photographer is causing disturbance. If someone decides to report you because they are under the impression that you are causing disturbance you could end up being spoken to by the police, and at least in theory could potentially face prosecution.

It would be better - for the birds as much as for your own protection - to avoid trying to photograph any schedule 1 species (and perhaps other species as well?) if they have nests or young. The one main exception to this is probably where they are nesting in front of established permanent hides, on nature reserves etc. In cases like this there would be no suggestion that you are causing disturbance by taking photographs from these hides - if there was a possibilty of disturbance then the hides would be closed until the breeding birds had left. I don't know how photographing a nest of a schedule 1 bird from such a hide, without a licence, would be treated under the law - another 'grey' area perhaps? (I believe that the wording of the law says that they may not be photographed at the nest without a licence, but there must be countless people who photograph, for instance, avocets at the nest from hides on bird reserves in East Anglia).