>Perfect response Michael
You lumped all photographers in a "group", and your "data" of 80% of
unscrupulous photographers I'm sure is an accurate number from diligent
note-taking. And lets not forget when people tell us how long they have been
birding or leading tours....that makes their OPINION more valid. This is
exactly why the discussion should be ended. Everyone has their opinion, and
Michael is right, there are jerks with cameras out there. But the discussion
goes nowhere except to vent personal feelings towards unscrupulous people.
And those people could care less what they do.
Nothing anyone has to say about this topic could possibly add any value, but
go for it...because I know these type of silly discussions won't end.
Jonah

Well, Jonah---BTW, thanks for the gratuitous sarcasm, very classy on your
part----when I was the hopefully conscientious operator of the of the
Vancouver BC Bird Alert, a post from which I was summarily removed because I
was too conscientious, I noticed a pattern of photographer-based abuse of
the birds: flushed shorebirds, disrupted nesting birds, and disrupted owls.
By photographers who needed a full-frame shot, not birders who were
satisfied by a simple sighting. I then removed the exact sighting locations,
not a popular decision---okay with most birders, but photographers like you
hated it. So, Jonah... Oh, you know what those three little dots means, eh?
Don't have to say them out loud, yeah? I mean, you have your pride, right?
Okay, if you still don't get it, it's irony. It's even sarcasm. It means,
according to your own wording, you're one of them, not us.

Michael Price
Vancouver BC Canada
loblollyboy at gmail.com

Every answer deepens the mystery.
- E.O. Wilson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20110424/adaaf93b/attachment.htm