It must be followed by tangible action.

Sime, (...a letter to me)


That is a pretty logic and significant question because I have personally seen some very visible direct negative effects on the environment caused by nature photographers themselves!!!. The first type is accidental - anyone who has photographed any of the "charismatic mega-fauna" of India can probably recall situations where photographers were climbing over one another - and vegetation and wildflowers - to get a better shot of that _______ (bear, lion, elephant or whatever). They didn't mean to trample that rare and endangered orchid, but they still did it. And, unfortunately, I've also seen examples of intentional negative impact - I've actually watched a photographer painstakingly line up a shot of a flower and then, after getting his shot, promptly pluck the flower - presumably to keep anyone else from getting the shot! And these same people speak of creating awareness through their photographs.


It's obvious that the creation of awareness (of some problem) is the necessary first step in driving any social change. But, in itself, creation of awareness does nothing. It must be followed by tangible action (e.g., changes in government policy, society's behaviour, etc.) before anything comes of it. When I decided to make the plunge into studying forestry and wildlife, I decided it had to be done with a strong emphasis on conservation. Felix



Felix and I had a brief email between ourselves on flickR, I posed the question "how do we make people aware of nature being destroyed - photograph it being destroyed?" ...this was Felix' reply which I like a lot.. interesting.



Please have a look at Felixs' photos on flickR