fieldherping.eu

I've talked about this face to face with a few herp enthusiasts so I thought I'd post this question here because I'm curious what people think.

Is it really necessary to catch vipers for photography?

My opinion is that it is not and I often wonder why people do it. Because of their behavior vipers are fairly easy to approach close enough (especially with nowadays technology, i.e. photo lenses) to get great photos without having to touch them. And if you don't succeed the first time around you are most likely to have a second (or a third, fourth, etc.) chance because as most of you know they seldom stray away from their favorite basking spots. All you have to do is stick around for a few minutes.

The way I see it, there are many benefits of not catching them - less stress for the animal, avoiding risk of harming the animal (e.g. incorrect handling by the tail, broken fangs (if it bites into gloves), etc.), avoiding risk of harming the photographer, more natural photos and so on...On the other hand I don't see what benefits it brings to catch them photography and other-wise? The result is numerous photos of vipers (here and elsewhere online) which all look more or less the same, i.e. a stressed, coiled snake, in a tense ready-to-strike position. No offence to anybody but no matter how good a photographer is, how nice the light is or how beautiful the snake is after seeing hundreds of those photos it gets really boring. This is the reason why when I see a post with such photos I tend to just quickly scroll through them without paying much attention...I've just seen it soooooo many times.

What do you think?

I think it is not necessary for good images to catch them. For sure it is more difficult to get nice clean shots, which are more popular and look better to many people. I also think, if you are driving 10 hours to a spot for a nice image, it is ok, to harm one or two individuals, but I don't see the point to harm every animal found. Especially if it is about pregnant individuals, freshborns... It is always a thing of which time of the year, in which condition is the animal and how the animal reacts to the catch. I saw a lot of people who handled the animals very very wrong, using snake hooks which are big enough for Bitis gabonica, it is just a matter of time to crush some of their rips. When I photograph vipers ex situ, the whole procedure is done in under 5 min.. If the animal is to stressed ok, no image for me get out on the point of finding. Always the question how it is done... for sure the best way would be to leave them alone and don't harm them at all.

For sure it is best to try and photograph vipers in situ. But I think it is ok in some circumstances to briefly handle the snake safely with appropriate material. I think you can make really cool shots in situ, but you have to be able to visit good herp locations from time to time in order to make decent in situ shots because most of the time they are just in awkward positions with low quality surroundings photo-wise. Some individuals are really cooparative (meaning that they lay still after putting them on a good spot) and then taking good pictures doesn't take a long time. It has to be stressed that the vipers have to be released at the spot where they were found. Don't run around with the snake, don't try to grab it by the neck, don't force unwilling snakes in certain positions, leave gravid females alone etc. are all things that need to be respected. I think a short moment of stress doesn't really do any harm to a viper on the long term. My big issue that I have with some herpers/photographers is that they don't respect snake habitat and destroy microhabitats (and that also goes for other subdisciplines in wildlife photography).

I have a similar opinon as Niklas.
The best shots are taken in situ and the less harm to the animals aswell. However sometimes it makes a way better photograph if you catch them. When I do so I never transport them anywhere else, I just let them sit more in the open. When ever they get too stressed I let them go immediately, and because they are just where I found them, they dont get lost somewhere far from their hidingspot. Its important to stress them as little as possible.

Thank you guys for your replies!

I just want to clarify that my point with this question was not to judge people that catch vipers to photograph them, I know most people on this forum do, but rather to understand what's the reason for it. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see a point in it.

Everything that Niklas, Pablo & Paul are saying is correct and I'd like to think that most herpers would respect those things but unfortunately a lot of them are just too busy playing Indiana Jones to stop and think about what they are doing, or maybe they just don't even care...Like so many things these days it is more important to get a photo at all costs and post it on Facebook or fieldherping.eu than to just enjoy the experience of finding and observing wildlife.

Ilian Velikov wrote:I just want to clarify that my point with this question was not to judge people that catch vipers to photograph them, I know most people on this forum do, but rather to understand what's the reason for it. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see a point in it.

Few years ago one of my professors asked me why I'm doing research on snakes? First I answered something about conservation, ecology, evolution etc... But later I find the real answer. I do research because I really like find snakes.

So, maybe the main reason of catching vipers is the feeling to find/catch them, and the photography is secondary.

Edvard Mizsei wrote:

Ilian Velikov wrote:So, maybe the main reason of catching vipers is the feeling to find/catch them, and the photography is secondary.

Respect to you Edvard for admitting this! Of course, weather we admit it or not we all get a thrill from catching snakes.

Edvard Mizsei wrote: So, maybe the main reason of catching vipers is the feeling to find/catch them, and the photography is secondary.

Correct
But I know some guys, catching a Malpolon, Dolichophis, Hierophis or even a Platyceps is much more "being a real hero", than lifting just a viper

A very good question Ilian!
I was thinking a lot about that in the past.
There are two hearts beading, the endless love for Herps and the Hunter.
I´m a hunter (from time to time I need an Adrenalin push) and my fire arm is my camera.
I need a Trophy shot!
There is no doubt that the best pics are “in situ” shot`s!
I can walk true my home range just to observe and at the other Day I made some in situ pics (just a part of the body in the high grass)
And there are some other Days when I need Adrenalin shot`s!
When I go to other countries I need Trophy shot`s, that is the reason why I`m there.
Sometimes I call friends (some allow me to picture with open windows), especially in the Winter time and ask if I can make pics of their collection. They ask “again”? and I say “I need it”!
I think I`m not alone with this “problem”.

As mentioned above, I think there is a soul hunter inside us.
I love to find and find snakes. Then with the photo of a captured snake you can illustrate certain details that the photo in situ does not allow.
Of course the in situ is natural, real.
I see that the tendency is divided into two, those who have done many photos with manipulated animals, now do the purists and only want the in situ, and some young people who have grown up with in situ myth.
We were born 140 years ago we would have driven the vipers to kill them. 50 years ago we would have put them in terrarium. 20 years ago we hunt them to make photos and leave them free. Today the new generation makes it in situ. In 20 years the new generation will stay home and send a drone to overtake the habitats without causing a minimum of disturbance to the entire ecosystem?