<div dir="ltr">Hi Tom,<div><br></div><div>At least the pelagic birds do not run the risk of being hit by cars. The owls at the East 90 run substantial risk while hunting close to the road and coming up out of the ditch.</div><div>This is now much worse since photographers leaving the area tend to load up their gear and take off at high speed once they have their pics.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm not sure this changes the ethics but it is worth consideration.</div><div><br></div><div>Ronda</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 9:30 PM Tom Benedict via Tweeters <<a href="mailto:tweeters@u.washington.edu">tweeters@u.washington.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Nov 16, 2024, at 13:46, Nancy Crowell via Tweeters <<a href="mailto:tweeters@u.washington.edu" target="_blank">tweeters@u.washington.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> Baiting is against the principles of ethical wildlife photography. <br>
<br>
But it’s done routinely by pelagic birdwatching trips. Is “chumming” an approved exception to this principle?<br>
<br>
Tom Benedict<br>
Seahurst, wA<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tweeters mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tweeters@u.washington.edu" target="_blank">Tweeters@u.washington.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters</a><br>
</blockquote></div>