Why do photographers shoot pictures of animals in the wild dying, (not from conflict)and do nothing?

Question

Don't they have any empathy, how can you not rescue the animal? To me that means photographers have no ethics and are only driven by sales. The beings they watch die have feelings and suffer, or are their photographers that can see past a picture????

Ice, you don't know me, and I do rescue every cat in my neighborhood, have found good homes for 15 so far.

you know pragmatism isn't very ethical

If you read my question I said animals that are dying not due to conflict, I'm talking about infant penguins.

Wild or not doesn't matter if you can help and you choose not to, you're a rotten immoral voyeur

I can't believe how you people don't get it, once a human is introduced into the wild you have already disrupted nature. You have already affected the environment, it is no longer wild, so you should have the decency to help, but you're so st**id , you don't even realize this

None of you understand that byhaving access to these animals you have already changed nature, too late, over you cannot unchange it once you walk away. Having no feelings for a fellow being isn't so far away from Kitty Genovese, have a nice day

Answer 1

Hmmmm, so you want the photographer to go fight the lion to save the wildebeest ?

Plus, what would a photographer do to help ?

He is not a veterinarian.

Plus saving that poor dying animal, would take food away from other animals, who need it to survive.

Would you want some hyena pups to starve to death, just to save a dying water buffalo ?

Answer 2

Death is a part of life. Sure a photographer can save a baby penguin from dying, but this will just mean that some animal that that scavenges dead carcasses, like a seal ,a polar wolf or even a polar bear with go hungry and die.
Nothing in the nature is wasted. Death of one animal will mean life for other animals.
So what kind of right does a photographer have to decide which animal's right to live is more important?
The nature operates in its own way, it is best to look but not to touch. Which is exactly what a photographer does by taking a photo but not disturbing the natural process.

Answer 3

wild is the key word here.

Have you every heard the saying leave only footprints, take only pictures.

Approaching an animal in the wild is just stupidity. They are not used to people, nor do they like their territory invaded. So unless the photographer wants to get tramples or gored to death then leaving the animal be is probably the wisest choice.

As a side note how would you intended to rescue a moose, deer elk or bear. An animal that can way a few hundred pounds when all you have on you is a backpack, digital camera and a tripod?

Answer 4

Is there a bar within a mile of your house. Do you go down there and take the keys away from every drunk so that someone doesn't die from their bad driving? How can you sit there and asking questions when there are thousands of human beings being slaughtered on the roads each year by these drunk drivers? Where are your ethics? Do you not feel any sympathy for the families of the victims? Let's float back into reality for a moment, ok. Unless you're rescuing every cat that gets hit by a car in your town you really can't judge these photographers for taking a piece of a natural event and immortalizing it.

Answer 5

Because its a part of nature. In many cases its ilegal to help it.

Death happens in nature. The photographer records this, hoping the world will understand this. This same reason is why the photographer will not intervene, in order to allow nature to run its course.

Answer 6

I doubt that anyone is going to be able to get you to understand that death is a part of life, the very last part maybe, but an important one. The natural world has it's own way of handling everything, if humans would only stop messing it up.

Answer 7

They are just capturing real life on film.

You really expect them to capture the realities of the world in a photo with sunshine, rainbows, and unicorns? The real world isn't all good and it shouldn't portrayed that way.

Answer 8

"in the wild" is real life, they are not pets, the world works well without man interfering