Pixiq

I can appreciate the possible issues. Maybe he was told no cameras were allowed and wanted to shoot anyway. Maybe he missed it. Maybe it wasn't said. Maybe there were signs or not. Maybe he missed them. I don't know anything about marine mammal sensitivity to the sounds that electronic cameras make so I can't comment. But, certainly the staff could be less righteous and less abrasive (if they indeed were). ---- What I can say is that the last bit where Lingenfelser says in his letter that Welsh could be in violation of a felony statute and they should both let it go sounds like attempted intimidation to me and that is very low indeed.

Vale! Save the whales.

These organizers cannot act as judge and jury. If they do believe he broke the law using his camera, then they are guilty of destruction of evidence. They cannot arbitrarily pick a punishment for the photographer because they believe he broke the law. Even if he was playing the whales like a drum, they need to contact the authorities. This was an overstep.

I can see telling him to turn it off, but if someone destroyed my personal property I would be highly pissed.

I agree about that last sentence. A thinly veiled threat that screams "we know we screwed up by deleting your footage." is all that is.

It is not a crime to photograph a Marine Mammal as long as you don't harass or "take" it. It is a crime to harass or "take" a Marine Mammal without a permit. If it was a crime to photograph Marine Mammals there would not be any whale watching boats full of photographers and sightseers operating all over the place taking people out to see the whales and other marine mammals.

What is important to understand here is that "take" does not mean to take a photograph. "Take" means to kill the mammal or cause it to abandon behaviors that are required for its survival by harassing it.

I would like to point out that Manatees are also Marine Mammals. They are photographed all the time by people in the water with a camera.

"I would prefer to leave things stand where they are, so should you. is a bluff to prevent charges being filed against the person that stole photos.

I found this after i posted the above:
(13) The term "take" means to harass, hunt, capture, or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal.

Thanks for the support guys!

it's clearly an issue of privacy of the whale. remember, many of these whales are children, and unclothed. THAT's why it is a felony to take their pictures.

I can see both sides here.

The guy comes across as a bit of a whiny ass. He was there to work. Doesn't matter if you're paid or volunteering, you're there to work. Sounds dumb to me, trying to take photos while you're supposed to be holding a whale.

The point about it not being a petting zoo was well made.

The point about whales being spooked by sounds is less believable, but unless there's a whale expert here I think we have to accept it; I wouldn't give much time to a marine biologist telling me how to make a movie.

The felony thing is BS, as others have pointed out, and makes the writer sound like a self-important 'look at me, I'm in charge of helping the poor animals' jerk.

The constitutional arguments by the photographer are BS, as usual. Searching & deleting may have been a crime, it may have been a civil tort, but it wasn't unconstitutional; the constitution only binds the government, not a private whale charity.

Deleting material, or forcing someone to delete, is ALWAYS wrong. Huge no-no, theft, destruction of property, destruction of evidence, whatever.

On balance, neither of them are impressive, and both show some symptoms of Asshole Syndrome. 'No brains each' - as we say about a nil-nil draw soccer score in Scotland!

Mike

This is an opportunity to help the whales, not to have a nice video clip for facebook.

Let's point out that there are (and have been since the whales have been there) signs that clearly say no photography beyond a certain point, and no flash at all. Bringing his camera past that point and into the water was selfish and stupid. These whales are sick and in need of help, not paparazzi. The staff even offers to take a picture of you in the water with a whale if they are able to do so at the time you would like it done - there is simply no excuse for disregarding the rules like he did. I would also note that to properly take care of any of the whales when volunteering requires two hands (several have tried to bolt over the last few nights, and anyone who has been there knows how hard it is to keep their blowholes out of the water when they exhale). This guy WAS endangering the whale when he decided to make his little video.

Meanwhile, I am so very tempted to upload all of the nice pictures that I asked, and was permitted to take, from BEHIND the point where cameras are allowed.

It's pretty clear you didn't commit any kind of felony. As for the idea that a camera is going to spook a whale being held by some humans and surrounded by dozens of others is ridiculous beyond the point of absurdity.

@Heather

"electronic pulses" from the camera probably causes massive damage to the whales and that I put their health at serious risk."

Really? Can you cite the study that came from? Did it pass peer review?
I think Hans missed the signs stating no photography, and if other people were taking photos it appears likely the ball was dropped during the orientation as well. Would you consider updating your website so that it clearly states that no photography by volunteers is allowed? That seems to me to be the best way to clear up any misunderstandings in the future.

If you so desperately want footage of yourself holding a whale to post for your friends to see, go volunteer again and this time ask your girlfriend to take pictures of you from the appropriate place.

What a drama king. Stop making this about yourself, and start directing some positive energy toward those poor whales.

I really appreciate helping out stranded or injured animals of any species, and I do my part on a regular basis, but you tree hugging hippies are notorious for taking things too far. I gotta tell ya, that Dr. Dana and his hairy hippie girlfriend are very lucky that they didn't go home with a fat lip.

Just because a volunteer is there to help the wildlife, doesn't mean that he/she gives a damn about you and won't beat the snot out of you in a heartbeat to protect what's theirs.

If you think a volunteer has broken some sort of law, call a police officer if you feel you must, or simply ask him/her to leave. Rifling through a person's private photos/video and then deleting them, is taking it to a level that just screams "Send me home with a broken nose and a muddy ass!".

Oh, I have a question... How is a small pocket sized waterproof camera in video mode going to injure the whale more than implanting a gps tracking chip in one of those "poor poor" whales?

Doesn't that gps device also emit pulses that could injure it? Think about it, and quit using junk science to justify the treatment that Hans received.

So did the whale go ape or not?

My email to the MMC:

Attention: Robert G Lingenfelser Jr

With regard to the following link, I believe I understand both sides of the issue but it sounds as if your letters were whining and unprofessional. Further it appears you wrote them without verifying the issues with your staff. The volunteer may have been wrong in following your (perhaps communicated or uncommunicated) rules but that is no reason for your staff to confiscate his personal property and delete his private photographs. If he committed a crime then call the authorities to resolve it or let it go with an advisory warning. There is no reason for your staff to break the law by taking it into their own egotistic and vigilante hands. You and your organization have not acted professionally or within the law.

See: http://www.pixiq.com/article/man-told-he-is-guilty-of-felony-for-videota...

Harris T. Jannusch Jr.

Hey, you should write back and say that the woman who deleted the video is in violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. She deleted digital data without permission. If he wants play the felony game, so can we.

If the above cited video shooting was a felony violation, then Florida Wildlife Officers (ahem-unlike some delusional groups of people in Florida, FWO's actually DO have law enforcement powers) wouldn't have allowed the Reality TV crew accompanying them while filming for the show 'Operation Wild' to film a rescue of a beached whale up close in the below linked clip that aired nationally (at least once-I saw it) on Discovery Networks "Planet Green TV".

Clip is here: http://planetgreen.discovery.com/videos/operation-wild-whale-rescue.html

2) I have a great admiration and appreciation for those who work to ease the suffering of animals BECAUSE they care about animals. I have nothing but contempt for those who exploit the suffering of animals to further their own agendas, finances, etc. I have no idea which category the group in Florida falls in. In my opinion, it just makes sense that those who are getting paid to work towards animal welfare and are doing so out of genuine compassion, would be highly appreciative, thankful, helpful, and understanding towards unpaid, inexperienced, volunteers working towards the same cause.

3) Is there any reason, besides a) ego in need of an illegitimate power trip, b) legitimate confusion of law/animal welfare re: video of the whale, that would cause the rescue leaders to NOT want any video of the rescue? Was this rescue performed lawfully? Ethically? Using proper procedures? Etc? If the issue of the camera was due to it being operated too closely to the whale, then why delete the footage once the camera was taken away?

I think this is a proper discussion to be having, the day before the Rapture.

Tyranny of any sort should be outed.

This is not sarcasm. This is one of the best things about the instantaneous publishing capabilities of the web.

I think Mr. Welsh is owed an apology and the whole staff of the foundation should take a conflict resolution workshop.

Because you believe what you're doing is important doesn't place you above reproach.

and deleting the footage saves the whales how???

Next time we should just let the whales die. That way we wouldn't have jerks like you complain about a deleted picture.

May I elaborate?

The point is that Mr Walsh's feelings were hurt and he was embarrassed by being treated like someone of no importance. He went to help with the Whales because, I assume he wanted to do something important. This is not to belittle his motivations. Everyone does things things to be import, to matter, including people who work for Marine Mammal Foundations (huh?).

Most of the relationships most of us have are with humans. We are human animals. To insist on the importance of pilot whales and take that as an opportunity to make gestures that indicate that a fellow human has no importance is a little twisted. I would say that there are very deep issues at hand, but I will make a suggestion.

The parties should get together and discuss it without rancor and everyone should acknowledge the emotional needs of the other and apologize for hurting the feelings of anyone who feels their were injured.

If we can't do this we can't save our world because this is at the heart of everything that we do to hurt it.

How come the Chairman of the Board of the MMC can take care of two whales by himself? I smell some rotten fish.

This is typical of a blog. You yuse your admitted IGNORANCE to back up your silly whining.

"I imagine that covers volunteers as well"

Well...you IMAGINE wrong.

Carlos,

How come you miss this one:

Woman: Orlando Cop Broke My Teeth In Takedown
http://www.clickorlando.com/video/27960309/index.html

"several have tried to bolt over the last few nights"

I'm confused. What is it that they are doing to the whales? Why do they force them do stay on the beach instead of swimming off when they want to? Also, what inaudable sounds do cameras make that disturb the whales? Aren't they already being disturbed by having gotten beached and molested by volunteers?

You can also tell that his Hans Welch guy is an idiot for invoking the 4th Amendment...regarding a this group...proving once again that the idiots who bring up the Bill of Rights the most are the ones who understnad it the least.

The bill of Rights do NOT cover the Marine Mammal Conservancy sincethey are not the government.

I bet Hans Walsh is one of those idiots that bitches about the first amendment when a restauarnt or store refuses to serve someone for wearing an offensive t-shirt..or at YouTube when they delete a video.