Nature Photography: Photographing Wildlife Without Disturbance? (Part 1)

One could maliciously argue that photographing intruders only bring unrest into the forests and pressure animals in their already shrinking retreats and habitats. That they startle living beings or lure them in, all just to get a great shot. So much for the prejudices. But how much of that is actually true?

"Every person who sets even one foot into the forest, in turn, sets some animal in motion somewhere."

First, it must be stated—without intending to legitimize any specific behavior—that the forest, in general, is subject to ever-increasing stress caused by us humans. Because everyone feels entitled to spend their leisure time there. Do we want to stop the mushroom foragers from going cross-country to gather for their own supplies? The forest-bathing workaholics who want to escape everyday life among the trees, sometimes even off the beaten paths? The forestry workers carrying out their assigned tasks? The foresters who harvest wood from the forest so that more local timber is purchased? Or the hunters pursuing the increasingly popular and supposedly necessary hunt? On top of that, there are the hikers, the runners, the birdwatchers, and of course the children, who can finally romp around there in a way that isn't possible in the big city.

Consequently, there are no specific "troublemakers." At the same time, however, it must be taken into account that every person who sets even one foot into the forest, regardless of their motives, sets some animal in motion somewhere. A certain amount of reflection is necessary. In doing so, I am not even necessarily referring to the people who recklessly trample over plants, step on moss, and restlessly chase after a passing animal. Otherwise, it is no wonder if the forest feels like a deserted place devoid of life.

Wild animals adapt to their surroundings to a certain extent. The car noises from the nearby highway are no longer anything new in the long run; hikers on main paths are largely ignored, and cyclists are waited out until they have passed. However, if you walk cross-country, things look quite different.

I can only refer to sustainability indirectly. There is no such thing as "sustainable nature photography"—that would be nonsense, because the immediate environment does not benefit from the photographers. Neither the grass nor the animals. And yet, the actions of photographers can have a sustainable effect. By presenting images from the surroundings, one presents a world that remains hidden from the average passerby. Images can increase the significance or the value of our forests and the nature around us. The goal, therefore, is to sensitize our fellow human beings to our forests and the wildlife, which is having a harder time than ever before.

For this to succeed, one must not only present beautiful, perfect shots where spectacular animals are seen framed by a picturesque environment. Because, on the one hand, the increasing destruction of habitat must not be concealed, and on the other hand, through too many large-format portraits, the habitat itself is not shown. The viewer cannot further contextualize the image; it could have been taken anywhere.