Learning to use my DSLR camera... Capturing British wildlife!

In a previous post ('A walk in the wild... Britain?') I posted some photographs that I had taken whilst out walking with my dog, but wanted to get myself out dog-less and with a bit more time to sit and look. Today, in the glory of the first sunshine of the summer, I took out my camera and took a good long walk alone. I went to an area local to me - Cuckmere Haven and played about with a few different settings on my camera; I am by no means a photography expert, and am just trying to figure out my way around the camera! Here is what I came up with:

A close up image of a flower (not sure what type)

Bumblebee's hold a special meaning for me, and it was lovely to capture one up close! 

I sat with this Little Egret for some time, watching him wandering through the water... Unfortunately I made a movement which scared him away. 

Attempting to catch a fish perhaps? With no success I'm afraid!

I didn't manage to get a great shot of this black swan... I think it was at a bad angle in the light

I believe this is a Green Finch... Unfortunately came out a bit blurred

This is one for my big sister who loves blackbirds! 

An attempt at a close up on some smaller critters! I was fairly pleased with the results! 

A pretty little chaffinch! 

One of the easier animals of the day to capture! The only one that sat nice and still! 

I think this is a Lark, I watched it descend from the sky singing it's heart out! I managed to keep an eye on where it landed and get a little closer before it flew away. 

I've been trying to capture butterflies in flight, but not quite figured out how that should be done! 

I love seeing groups of birds in flight together... I'm not quite sure what these ones are! 

I spent ages trying to get an in-focus photo of a swallow! They were speeding around past me, and when I looked closer at the photographs I realised that they were carrying pieces of grass in their beaks... could they be nesting?

Result! Swallows sat still! 

A low saturation portrait of Cuckmere beach.

So I am very aware that my photographs aren't fantastic, but I'm practising what I can! Any advice would be very well taken :) 

I hope you enjoyed! 

BADGER CULL - Response from MP

Last week, after the decisions made by government to go ahead with the trial badger cull which is set to shoot 5,000 badgers (see blog - 'BADGER CULL GIVEN THE GO AHEAD'), I sent a letter to my local MP, Norman Baker, asking him to stand up against the cull. I thought that some of those who read this blog would be interested to see how he replied:

Dear Ms Jones

Thank you for contacting me recently concerning the selective cull of badgers, which the government has decided to authorise.

I looked into the issue of badger culling at great length when I was the Lib Dem shadow environment secretary before the last general election. The removal of badgers from TB hotspots is both a complicated and difficult issue. There is undoubtedly a serious problem with TB in both the English cattle and badger populations, which is getting worse. The proposed culls are designed to control bovine TB in a measured and targeted way and will apply in two specific areas where infection rates are high.

While I find the idea of a cull of badgers deeply distressing, I am afraid that choosing to do nothing about bovine TB at this time, given the current lack of a viable vaccine, is simply not a responsible option. Leaving things as they are for the time being can only increase the suffering caused by TB for cows, badgers and other wildlife vulnerable to the disease. Allowing TB to spread is not a good animal welfare policy for badgers themselves.

Bovine TB is one of the biggest challenges facing cattle farmers today. Around 28,000 cattle were slaughtered in England in 2012 as a bovine TB control measure, at a cost to the taxpayer of nearly £100million, rising to £500million over the past decade. As a political party with a long history of supporting animal welfare, Lib Dems would much prefer to vaccinate animals rather than cull badgers. I have worked as best I can in parliament to try and promote better cattle husbandry, pushing for greater bio security on farms and in cattle movement, in order to prevent the cross contamination. It is, however, inevitable that cattle allowed to graze outside in the natural environment, as they should be, will encounter wildlife that may be carrying harmful diseases.

Over the years various governments have tried to develop an effective badger vaccine and I personally pressed the previous government to develop a TB vaccine for cattle. £43million in total has been spent since 1994 on developing an oral bovine TB vaccine for badgers as well as cattle vaccine. I am pleased that the coalition has at least committed to investing a further £15.5million in vaccine development over the next four years.

We are told, however, that a viable cattle vaccine is at least 10 years away and current badger vaccination programmes have been shown to have an efficacy rate of only around 70% in those badgers that receive the vaccine. I am both frustrated and disappointed that so little progress has been made and, in light of the current increased pressure on this matter, I have now written to David Heath asking why it is taking so long and what can be done to reduce this 10 year period. I will inform you of the reply I receive in due course.

In the meantime I am absolutely clear that what will now take place in the South West over the summer is merely a trial cull. Any decision to extend the culling programme to other parts of the country would be dependent on an analysis of the two pilot culls.

I hope this is helpful.

Yours sincerely

Norman Baker MP

I am both pleased and upset by this response. I am pleased that Baker is pushing to get better vaccines worked on, and that he obviously has been a greater part of the debate... But at the same time seems to think that culling badgers is actually going to do something. Where he states that vaccinations "have an efficacy rate of only around 70%" I ask what the efficacy of culling is? Infected badgers will be pushed out in fear and further spread the disease. Surely 70% of cured badgers is better than 5,000 dead ones? I am also worried as to his response that "what will now take place in the South West over the summer is merely a trial cull" ... it seems such a light way of putting that 5,000 animals are going to be shot, and many more severely distressed. 

I really hope that those that keep pressurising the government, and the petition that has now been signed by over 250,000 people will do something to make a change to this ridiculous decision... but I sincerely doubt it. When do they ever listen? 

BADGER CULL GIVEN THE GO AHEAD

So the results have just come in on the long awaited debate, and under the vote of 299 Members of Parliament the slaughter  of 5,000 badgers will go ahead in a trial to see if it will prevent the spread of Bovine Tuberculosis to cattle. 

I understand culling as a necessary evil to maintain wildlife - it is a practise used to reduce over-population (preventing long drawn out starvation of species), and stop the spread of disease. I have recently over-come my complete and utter disgust at any killing of animals and come to see that sometimes it must happen in order to stop suffering and death. 

What I am struggling to understand here is that hard science has come in and said that culling badgers will NOT stop disease spreading in cattle. And yet the vote of around 299 people, many of whom have little to no understanding of wildlife management, has led to the doom of thousands of animals, many of which will not even have come in contact with the disease. 

Those supporting the badger cull claim that "vaccinations have no impact on already infected animals" , and that it will come of great expense to the country. (http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/vets-say-their-professional-body-was-wrong-to-support-government-badger-cull-8644638.html)

Yes, it is true that vaccinating already infected animals won't cure them... but there is a strong misunderstanding that culling the badgers will be a quick fix to the problem. In fact, for a cull to have any impact it has to be repeated over a series of around 4 years, killing thousands of animals in the process. To vaccinate uninfected animals would also take several years to make an impact, true, but also comes without the death of many innocents and without provoking huge outrage of the public. 

As for the expense, the government estimate it would cost £2,250 per square kilometre each year to effectively vaccinate the badgers in this country, opposed to the cost of £1000 per square kilometre each year for the cull. So yes, it clearly is the cheaper option. However, when you add on the estimated cost of policing during the cull of £1,429 per square kilometre each year it doesn't take a genius to see which will eventually be the cheaper option. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jun/03/badger-vaccination-cheaper-than-cull)

It is a terrible tragedy that this vote has gone through, and many of the opposition to the badger cull will be extremely disappointed. The fight against the cull has been supported by many celebrity figures including Dame Judi Dench, Brian May, Slash, Chris Packham and our beloved Sir David Attenborough. I have no doubt that their voices will remain prominent throughout this attack on our wildlife. 

Please comment and let me know what you think about the badger cull in Britain? Perhaps I have overlooked something and someone can convince me I'm wrong... because I just want to see that something positive can come from this, but I doubt that I will. 

Video in the fight against the Badger Cull featuring David Attenborough and

 the musical talents of Slash and Brian May. 

                                Still trying to stick up for the badgers - sign the petition to ask the
                                          government to stop the senseless killing.