After perching in the wrong spot, a red-shouldered hawk is dive-bombed by a white-tailed kite. Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS lens with the EOS-7D. ISO 800. Evaluative metering +1/3: 1/4000 sec. at f/7.1
Occasionally raptors invade each others personal space, be it to encroach on their hunting ground or perch too close to a nest. They can engage in aerial battles, sometimes in dramatic fashion. Such was the scene I witnessed recently when a red-shouldered hawk perched on a tree, and a white-tailed kite didn’t like it very much.
I was alerted to the commotion by the screams of the kite, as it dive-bombed the hawk to drive it away from its perch. I was hand-holding my 100-400mm zoom lens at the moment, so I turned and ran straight toward the group of trees in order to get in better range. I didn’t worry about sneaking, because I figured both birds were probably too preoccupied to care about my approach.
After perching in the wrong spot, a red-shouldered hawk is dive-bombed by a white-tailed kite. Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS lens with the EOS-7D. ISO 800. Evaluative metering +1/3: 1/3200 sec. at f/7.1
The kite swooped down on the hawk about five or six times, each dive causing the hawk to fly straight up and wheel over upside down to avoid the kite (who was quite a bit smaller than the hawk). Finally, the hawk gave up the flew away over the horizon. The kite also disappeared from view, presumably to return to a nearby nest or favorite perch. As soon as the commotion began, all other birds in the area disappeared to let these two birds of prey battle it out alone. After the fight was over, the entire forest was eerily quiet.
A coyote stops and stares as it makes its way along an animal trail. Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS lens with the EOS-7D. ISO 800. Evaluative metering +1/3: 1/1600 sec. at f/5.6
Recently I visited Arastradero Preserve in Palo Alto on a sunny afternoon. There were many warning signs posted about coyote encounters, telling hiker to keep their children with them at all times. I didn’t think much of it as I headed into the foothills. I was out to hopefully get some hunting raptor shots, and whatever else might cross my path. About half way through my hike, I rounded a bend in the trail to see this coyote making its way down a small animal trail. It saw me right away, but seemed rather nonplussed about my presence. I quickly took the opportunity to get several shots as it paused in a patch of sun.
A coyote stops along an animal trail to stand in a brief patch of sun. Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS lens with the EOS-7D. ISO 800. Evaluative metering +1/3: 1/1600 sec. at f/5.6
After a brief pause, the coyote turned and continued down a hill and stopped in the dark shadow of an impenetrable thicket. There is set down and proceeded to groom itself, scratching and biting at invisible pests. These were the longest views I’ve had of a coyote before, and I marveled at how many of its mannerisms were so close to domesticated dogs.
I was happy for this surprise encounter, as I had only ever seen coyotes before in the early morning or at dusk. In future outings, I hope to see a bobcat, or possibly even a mountain lion.
A California ground squirrel peeks up out of its burrow. Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS lens with the EOS-40D. ISO 640. Evaluative metering -2/3 stop: 1/400 sec. at f/8
This morning I was alerted to a sad recent development at a local park by Peter J. Metropulos, a fellow participant in a local wild bird discussion email list. Based on a recent article in the Almanac (a local newspaper), last August, the city of Menlo Park contracted with an exterminator to kill off the ground squirrels at Bedwell Bayfront Park, which is situated along the San Francisco Bay. The worry was that a growing squirrel population would eventually dig though the cap that covered the landfill on which the park was built, and drag garbage to the surface. Upon being notified of this issue, the city counsel conducted their own investigation, and determined that the squirrel population needed to be reduced.
Metropulos raised the following concerns in his email. “The tiny bit of undeveloped bay land habitat that remains in San Mateo County is under a constant threat of destruction. One of the precious few bits left is Bayfront Park. This was perhaps our last opportunity to provide a place for Burrowing Owls to re-colonize (they rely on ground squirrel burrows for nesting). Now with the squirrels gone that hope is gone as well.
“The California Ground Squirrel is a native mammal, not an introduced vermin like the roof rat, and it is an important component of our local ecosystem. In addition, having our own local ‘prairie dog’ colony has provided an easily-observable wildlife experience for the general public. People like watching the busy little critters running around. Local residents have been robbed of a part of their natural history.”
Now I’m not arguing that this type of action is never appropriate (although I do know which side of the argument my bias would land me on). But at the very least, before a decision like this is made, we must have careful, thorough scientific study, and input from local citizens. Before mid-level politicians decide to “play God” by poisoning a population of local wildlife, we need to consider the effects. How will this impact the food chain within which the ground squirrels are an integral part? What about all the birds of prey that feed on them? What about the dwindling burrowing owl population that relies on the ground squirrels to excavate their homes?
As a wildlife photographer, I can’t help but have a respect and care for the creatures that grace me with their presence. It saddens me any time I see people meddling in nature, especially when it looks like was done with little thought about the wider implications. I really hope that is not the case here.
I think the worst part of this entire situation is the fact that the public was not notified of the burrow poisoning before it was conducted. I hope that the Menlo Park city counsel releases details of their “own investigation” to the public. I also pray that the probable impacts on other species was taken into account before they concluded that poisoning a native species was the best course of action.
Unfortunately, it appears that this event was not treated with the care that it deserves. The article concludes, “[Deputy City Manager Kent Steffens] said he didn’t know how many burrows were baited with poison, or how many squirrels died as a result. Neither did a representative from [the extermination contractor] Animal Damage Management, who said the technician who carried out the contract was on vacation.”
Every once in a while a photo comes along that I love, but seems to break many of my own guidelines that I usually follow. Many times when I’m out shooting wildlife or birds, I’ll take a few photos of the surrounding area, or try to include some habitat, to help me remember where I was and what the conditions were like. This is especially important when I’m making bird portraits. If my goal is a simple, clean background, it can be easy to forget what the surrounding area was like when I only see a bird’s head and shoulders in the photo. The photo of the long-billed curlew above was one such “habitat” shot that I took recently.
As I was reviewing my photos, I found that I really liked this one, even though it wasn’t intended as a keeper. I also realized that it breaks some of the rules that I like to follow in my bird photography. I put myself in the role of photo critic, and came up with the following negative aspects of this image.
1. Cluttered background – In most wildlife photography, one goal in creating a successful photo is to simplify the shot as much as possible. Eliminate distracting elements and leave only those that help support the subject. In this photo, the background is busy and the water surface messy.
2. Depth of field issues – The curlews in the background are out of focus. Are they part of the subject of the image? It is not clear from the focus alone. They are too blurry to be successful subjects, but not abstract enough shapes to blend well into the background.
So then, given the above criticisms, why do I like the photo so much?
1. Color – I absolutely love the color in this photograph. I like the pastel blues and tans, and the black in the first curlew’s feather pattern really pops.
2. Wildness – Sometimes the simple portrait with a pure single color background can get old. Even though they can be elegant, sometimes they lack the wild and wooliness of the real natural world. This photo serves up enough chaos to do justice to all the birds eating and preening in a bunch that morning.
3. Leading lines – The photo leads the viewers eye well through the frame and into the distance. Starting naturally at the bird on the left in sharp focus, the eye is attracted to the sleeping bird to the far right of the frame, because of the repeated shape of the first bird. Then the eye draws up and left along the line of birds, finally resting on the bird in the upper left of the photo, which is the farthest distinguishable object from the camera.
It is important to choose your best images in order to edit your collection of photos. Beyond that however, it is important to understand why you chose those photos. Doing so will help you to make better informed decisions about future photos, instead of just going with your gut. Next time you say to yourself, “I really like this one,” or “this one doesn’t work for me,” dig a little deeper and list out what you like or don’t like about a photo. What you come up with when your really think about it might surprise you.
So what do you think? A nice break from the norm, or not your cup of tea? Love it or hate it, I’d love to hear your opinion in the comments below.
