Whilst I appreciate in any discussions there are arguments for and against and would never berate anyone for any practise they use, there is one point most people seem to be missing.
When peiople chill these insects they have quite often been netted/captured and taken out of their natural habitat. To release the insect after you have phtotographed it is almost as bad as consigning the insect to certain death.
If you release an insect somewhere which is not its natural habitat it will stand out like a sore thumb and is bound to be picked of.
This is where I feel we have a responsibilty both to the insects and our ecology.
How many photographers take insects home photograph them, then take them back to where they were taken from? Not many I suspect.
We have a varied and unique fauna which is disapearing all the time with our activities, pollution, impact on the ecology of our natural resources, etc.
As a photographer and conservationist my main responsibilty will always be to protect the fauna and flora.
The article on chilling, compelling as it may be fails to point out there are many insects which do not respond well to chilling, and will have an adverse effect on the insect.
It is all well and good for this process to happen naturally in the wild, i.e low tempratures, make insects torpid but they have coping and survival mechanisms in place to protect them under these circumstances.
When we interfere in these matters we are exposing them to unecessary stresses. I would much prefer to lose sleep and go out at first light looking for the insects in their natural environment than capture, chill then release the insect in a foreign environment.
Interesting discussion.
Nogbad
|