Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta Lake - PDF document

Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta Lake - the role of bird photographers Seshadri KS, Krishna MB, Shashank Balakrishna, Sunil Kumar M, Prabhakar BS, Nitin R, Kishan SB, Vinay KS, Gautham GS, Venkat Narayan, Sushant Potdar, Piyush Daga, Pawan Kumar T. Email addresses at the end. February 2013 SummaryActivities such as bird and wildlife viewing, birdphotography, hiking and nature trails appearbenign but an increasing body of evidencesuggests otherwise. While there are severalpositive aspects for visitors and tourists, thereis usually little benefit to the habitat from suchrecreation. Assessing and documenting theimpacts visitors may have on the ecology ofthe habitat is among the fundamental premis-es and challenges in the emerging branch ofscience termed as ‘Recreational Ecology’ Here, a rapid assessment of the impactscaused by nature photographers driving onthe dry Hesaraghatta lake bed has beenattempted. Results indicate that a wide andextensive network of vehicle tracks amountingto about 43 km exist in the lake area.About136 ha of habitat was either lost or dis-turbed because of vehicle movement and onan average, 20 vehicles were found to be pur-suing birds on weekends and holidays.Several incidents where unethical means suchas chasing the bird till it is tired and reluctantto fly were being used to photograph birds,especially the rare, vagrant and migrant birds(including the Red Data Book [19] species aswell). While we suggest several methods to mitigate the impacts of this unregulated mode of operation, we believe that self regulation is the best way forward (even though it has had limited success in the past) for the habitat, life- forms and for photographers. The findings from this study are widely applicable to nature tourism, eco tourism and other recreationalactivities in natural areas as well. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 2 An exhausted Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) being photographed IntroductionNature awareness, affordability of binoculars,cameras, digital technology and vehicles hasincreased participation in nature related activi-ties. However, increased human presence inwilderness areas is damaging the habitat andadversely affecting ecological processes. InBangalore, many nature enthusiasts and pho-tographers visit natural areas often, especiallyon weekends and holidays to photograph win-ter migrant birds (September-April).Hesaraghatta lake is one such place. Use ofvehicles for photography is becoming increas-ingly common. This is because birds in gener-al, are far more tolerant to people in vehiclesthan on foot.The Problem: This mode of photography dam-ages the habitat that the birds live in, ratherthan the bird directly. The situation inHesaraghatta lake area has aggravated withthe occurrence of rare birds like the EuropeanRoller or the Pied Harrier, being chased andcornered by 15-20 photographers till it is tired.This problem has persisted for over four yearssince it was first highlighted in 2009 [1]. Thisgenerated several discussions and sugges- tions such as withholding location information, public shaming and self regulation were made [1]. However, the problem continues with more photographers in the fray. This study aims to assess the damage caused by off road driving for photography on the ecology of theHesaraghatta lake. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 3 Study Site: Hesaraghatta lake is located about30 km North West of Bangalore and is underthe Minor Irrigation Department of theGovernment of Karnataka. This lake was oncean important source of water supply toBangalore and is therefore of historical impor-tance. The total area of Hesaraghatta lake bedis about 744 ha (1912acres) and the waterspread area in August 2009 was about 400 ha(or 980 acres). However, in recent years, thelake has been essentially dry.The Vegetation: The lake bed vegetation is intransition. From being a true aquatic commu-nity, the vegetation in the lake bed is undergo-ing a process of ‘Ecological Succession’ [fol-lowing 2, 3]. It shows in various parts, different‘Seral’ stages of terrestrial vegetation forma-tions and is currently a grassland-savannah-woodland complex [following 4]. The centre ofthe lake has more open grasslands while thewoodland component increases towards theperiphery. Apart from various species of grass-es, aquatic and terrestrial plants like Typha,Ipomea,Sonchus emilifolia,Cassiamimosoides, Cassia siamea, Tephrosia, Sida , Altenanthera, Celosia, Stachytarpeta indica,Parthenium hysterophorous, Acacia leu-cophloea, otherAcaciaspecies, Calotropisgigantia, Lantana camaraand Eupatorium are found there. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 4 Birdlife: When the lake had water, many openwater dependent migrants such as theNorthern Shoveller (Anas clypeata), NorthernPintail (Anas acuta) and Garganey (Anasquerquedula) would inhabit the lake. Amongthe shorebirds, several waders like CommonRedshank (Tringa totanus), CommonGreenshank (Tringa nebularia), WoodSandpiper (Tringa glareola), CommonSandpiper (Actitis hypoleucos), Black-wingedStilt (Himantopus himantopus), Little RingedPlover (Charadrius dubius) were also foundthere. With the drying of the lake, only birds whichprefer the grassland or marginal wetlandscome here. The Western Marsh HarrierCircus aeruginosus), Pallid Harrier (Circusmacrourus), Pied Harrier (Circus melanoleu-cos) and Montagu’s Harrier (Circus pygargusare known to roost in this area. Several eagleslike Short-toed Snake Eagle (Circaetus galli-cus), White-eyed Buzzard (Butastur teesa),Lesser Spotted Eagle (Aquila pomarina),Greater Spotted Eagle (Aquila clanga), TawnyEagle (Aquila rapax) are also found here.These eagles usually prefer perches on tree-tops or on termite mounds. Several smallerfalcons like Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni),Common Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus), Red-headed Falcon (Falco chicquera) are known tofrequent the area. Also found are the IndianPeafowl, cuckoos, wren-warblers, pipits, larks,drongos, and bush-chats which are seldompursued by photographers. Currently, the lakeis dry except for a puddle and none of thewater birds other than egrets are found. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 5 Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus), a frequently sought after species byphotographers, on an Acaciatree. MethodsVehicle counts:The number of vehicles activein the study area was counted by at leastthree observers, located in a position to viewthe entire lake bed from morning to noon. Ontwo occasions, vehicle counts were alsoobtained in the evening. The type of vehicle,time of first detection and time of exit from thelake were recorded. Photographers enteringthe study area in four and two wheelers werecounted on four days (one Saturday and threeSundays). Weekends were chosen as thenumbers of photographers are high on thesedays. Vegetation damage assessment: The damageto vegetation was estimated by measuring thelength and width all the existing vehicle tracksin the study area. Tracks were first mapped with a GPS receiver. Subsequently, tracks visi - ble on Google Earth® (latest available satellite images as of September 2012) were also digi - tized and added. The survey teams walked, excepting a one-time two wheeler ride to esti - mate track length. The vehicles which theyused to reach the lake bed were also included. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 6 This rapid assessment of habitat damagehad two objectives: Determine the extent of vehicular usagein the lake area, in terms of vehiclecounts and measurement of the result-ing track length. Estimate the trampling impact on vege-tation due to vehicles. Damage to vegetation on the vehicle trackswas assessed using randomly placed rope-line transects [5] across existing tracks. In thisimprovised method, two persons held a stan-dard 6m. tape across the track at the heightof the vegetation, which was photographed bya third person on the centre of the track andperpendicular to the tape. This was carried outat 77 random points on the tracks. The loca-tion details and corresponding photographnumbers were recorded for analysis. Theabsolute width of the track was determinedfrom the photographs using the proceduredescribed next.Analyis of photographs:The track photographconsidered for measurement was opened on acomputer and a screen pixel measuring tool(used both JR Screen Ruler and Ruler by JeffKey) was overlaid on the tape in the photo-graph. The pixel length of the tape was measuredbetween the thumbs of two individuals holdingit. The distance between the thumbs wasmaintained at 6 m. The fully damaged (A), partially damaged (B)and not damaged (C) parts of the track weremeasured using the pixel ruler. The width of the damaged track was deter-mined by considering the relative proportionsof the tape and the track on the photograph. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 7 AAC Vegetation damage frequency: As a parallelcheck, a frequency based assessment foreach image was made at 30 regular points .on the photograph using the pixel ruler. Thevegetation damage for each point was noted. The points were tabulated as “Not Damaged”(C), “Partially Damaged” (B) and “FullyDamaged” (A), based on the flattening of veg-etation, appearance of bare patches andcracks on the dry ground. Of the 30 equally spaced points, equivalent tobeing 20cm apart on the rope transect usedto estimate the width of the track, most pointsfell on un-damaged vegetation. This graph isto show that the length of the rope transectchosen was adequate and wide enough tosample the width of the damaged track. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 8 C ResultsVehicular movement: A total of 71 four wheel-ers (cars and SUVs), a three-wheeler and sixtwo-wheelers were counted on four days. Thisaveraged to 20 vehicles per day. The highestnumber of four wheelers, 26, was counted ona day that had a rare bird sighting (TheEuropean Roller Coracias garrulus). The vehi-cles were seen approaching the bird and fol-lowing it relentlessly as it flushed from oneopen perch to another. Incidentally, the birdhas been listed as “Vulnerable” in the Red Listpublished by theInternational Union forConservation of Nature and NaturalResources (IUCN) [19]. The average time duration spent by each vehi-cle pursuing the birds was 3.5 hrs. However, afew vehicles were present from 0600 to 1800hrs, with a break between 1200 and1400 hrs.Each vehicle was observed to drive at leastfive times in the entire study area. Some ofthese vehicles were driven at visually estimat-ed speeds of 40-50 kmph to get to a perchingbird which was then stalked carefully atspeeds less than 10-20 kmph. Most individu-als photographed from vehicles while a fewgot down from the car and crawled toapproach a bird. Whenever a vehicle stoppednear a bird, about 4-5 vehicles converged onto the spot and circled around. If the birdflushed, there would be a frenzy to reach thebird again first. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 9 The network of tracks which exists today in brown; waterspread of August 2009 in blue Vehicle Track Length: The total track lengthwas about 43 km, including existing pathways.Photographers’ contribution to the track lengthwas estimated to be about 25 km. This wasdeduced from interactions with local peopleand by field observations. Much of the tracks seen on Google Earth®imagery and in the field today are post 2010as the study site was marshy till then. Therewere both arterial tracks and their branches.The total track length measured in this surveyis an underestimate because several lesserused branches were not considered for themeasurement. Most photographers enter thestudy area on one or two tracks but thenbranch off depending on where the birds are.It was also observed that the vehicle trackswere more extensive near and around trees orshrubs on which birds perch. The vehicleborne photographers locate a bird on such aperch, drive cautiously towards it, inching asclose to the bird as possible. On a particularday, ten vehicles were found to encircle aperch in a period of about five hours. Theradius of such circles was 10-15 m. Birds nor-mally fly away from an approaching vehicle.However, on several occasions, when vehiclesapproached a Common Kestrel close, the birdran to avoid the photographers rather than fly-ing. We believe that this avoidance behaviourwas not because the bird was too lazy to flybut it was too tired to fly. It is likely that othervehicles had pursued the bird earlier and ithad little energy left. Vegetation loss: Effects of moving vehicles were measured on photographs of 77 sample points spread randomly across the tracks. The average damage to vegetation (partially dam - aged and fully damaged) was 27%. This esti - mate is of the width of the fully exposedground plus the partially damaged shoulderand inter-track space. Therefore, for a 6m.sample width, an average of 27%damageamounts to 1.62 m. This means that every time a vehicle drives over natural vegetation, an average swath of 1.62 m. is damaged orlost. Multiplying this value with the total track length of 43 km results in an area of 7 ha (17 acres). 17.6 km of tracks were found on the erstwhile water spread area of 400 ha. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 10 Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 11 HighlightsTotal area of lake bed: 744 haWaterspread area in August 2009: 400 haAverage number of vehicles per day: 20Average time spent chasing birds: 3.5 hrsNumber of sampling points: 77Rope transect length: 6 mMean width of track: 1.62 m (±0.16 SE)Total length of tracks: 43 kmTotal length of tracks on ex-waterspreadarea: 17.65 kmFlushing distance: 15 mRoad effect zone in area: 136 ha Tracks of different usage intensities visible on Google Earth orGoogle Maps for the Hesaraghatta lake bed DiscussionStudies elsewhere have shown that the vegeta-tion height along the road shoulders reducedwith increasing vehicle movement. Tramplingleads to changes in vegetational compositionand structure. Off-road driving causes exten-sive crushing of vegetation and it has beenestimated that a standard car on hard groundexerts 1500g/cm2of pressure as compared to206g/cm2for an average sized human maleor 160g/cm2for an average sized humanfemale walking on hard ground [6]. Apart fromaffecting vegetation, trampling and driving alsodestroy the nests of ground nesting birds likethe Skylarks, pipits, and lapwings, to name afew. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 12 Disturbance: Moving vehicles damage habitats. Vegetation: The visible irreversible impacts onvegetation include flattening and breakage ofstanding stalks especially if woody, crushing offoliage, destruction of floral parts, prevention ofregeneration either by seed and seedling dam-age. Such damages result in reduction of speciesdiversity and facilitate an explosive spread ofecologically dominant species, usually weeds. Soil:Repeated vehicular movement affects soilvariously, top-soil damage being visually promi-nent. Soil compaction, caking and cracking,change in textural class, breaking of soil aggre-gates together contributing to reduced waterretention and percolation. Different levels of soilerosion (surface creep and suspension) may leadto deposition of soil particles on foliage resultingin reduced photosynthesis and thereby growth. Fauna: Damage to animals is observable. Birds,invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles are likelyto be run over by vehicles. Damage is com-pounded as several ground nesting birds loosetheir nests and young ones. Long term impacts:may extend to reduction incomplexity of food webs and imbalance in foodchains. (For example: loss of ground vegetation �reduction in abundance of grasshoppers � reduc-tion in prey base for insect feeding birds). The possibility of the dried up grass catching fireand spreading due to increased human activity isnot ruled out either [following 10]. The impact of such pressure causes proportion-al loss or compression of vegetation, prevent-ing regeneration and soil compaction. Assuming that each vehicle drives atleast fivetimes on the lakebed, then 20 vehicles on oneweekend day could drive over any point a 100times. Extrapolating this to 42 weekend daysbetween October and February where migrantbirds are plenty, we get 4200 passes on everytrack. Elaborate experiments elsewhere haveshown that vehicles cause more crushing/trampling than walkers and anywhere up to1828 passes will reduce the vegetation coverand biomass by 50 percent depending on thearea, terrain, etc [6]. The end result of vegeta-tional cover loss is analogous to calculatinghalf life. Assuming the same rate, given thenumber vehicles and the passes they make,about 75 percent destruction should becaused every migratory bird season. Plant succession: The long term damage tovegetation and ecological processes is some-thing which is not apparent at first look.Bangalore falls in the Tropical Dry DeciduousBioclimatic zone [8]. As mentioned earlier,grassland-savanna habitats in a tropical dry-deciduous bio-climatic zone are habitats influx. Left alone, it can be expected that suchhabitats will tend to grow into dry-deciduousforests by a process of ecological succession[9]. The damage to vegetation will affect thisecological process. If in the event of waterflowing in again, grass would get inundatedbut trees have a good chance of survivingflooding. They thus would continue to providesubstrates to those forms living on them. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 13 Calling out for help! Irresponsible driving can lead to problemsfor people too! Disturbance and flushing of birds:Considering bird behaviour, road disturbancewould not refer to the width of the road alonebut to a broader strip on both sides of theroad (road effect zone) defined by the flushingdistances of birds. Flushing distance is theclosest distance a bird would allow a vehicleto approach before flying off. This distancevaries with species, habitat and prior distur-bance. To determine the road effect zone in arapid assessment is difficult and hence, wehave used a road effect zone of 15 m oneither side of the road [10]. This behaviourhas been extensively used for determining theimpacts of anthropogenic activities on wildlife[11]. Ten observations made randomly vali-dates the earlier assumption of a 15 m flush-ing distance.Adding this ‘road effect zone’ tothe actual vegetation lost, the impacts becomemore signficant. A total width of 30m is dis-turbed on either side of each track. For theentire 43 km of track, the road effect zoneamounts to 136 ha or 336 acres. For thetracks on the waterspread area alone, whichwas 17.65 km, the road effect zone is 56 ha or138 acres which is roughly about half the areaof Lalbagh Gardens (97 ha). If computed tothe total water spread area, 138 acresamounts toabout 41 percent. A single vehicle is bad enough, but if 20 vehi-cles per day making 100 passes on the lakebed area each day for the entire winter sea-son are considered, the impact would be veryhigh. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 14 Tracks in black with the road effect zone in red and the water-spread area of August 2009 in blue Loss of host plants for Butterflies: A rarespecies of butterfly the Lilac Silverline(Apharitis lilacinus) was observed and pho-tographed during the study by one of theauthors (Nitin RA), after a span of 103 years,since it’s last confirmed sighting fromSoledevanahallilocated north of Bangalore. Asmall population of about 15-20 individualswas seen on the grass during the day. Thisspecies of butterfly is protected under theWildlife Protection Act of 1972 [18]. Thisspecies was earlier known from only a fewlocalities and was patchily distributed through-out the country. The recent rediscovery fromHesaraghatta provides an opportunity to gaininsights into the ecology and behaviour of thisspecies. The food plant of this butterfly is not known. However, it was observed that several host plants of other butterflies were crushed by off-road vehicle movement. Butterflies have specific host plants on which females deposit eggs and the larvae feed on the plant, pupate and metamorphose into adult butterflies.During this critical stage of development, thebutterflies are not given to moving and will succumb to any damage inflicted on the host plant. Persistent off-road driving will not onlydestroy common butterflies but also this rareand protected butterfly species in this area. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 15 Ethics: For most small sized raptors, feedingfrequently is important. The more a bird isflushed from its perch (by an over enthusiasticphotographer in this case), the more time andenergy it spends in flying from one perch toanother [12]. This reduces the time availablefor it to find food. In experimental studies else-where, a significant decrease in the food gath-ering rate was documented in wading birdsdue to vehicle movement [11]. Such actionsimpose immense physiological stress on thebird and may even lead to its death. On sever-al occasions in the past, there have beenreports of how photographers in vehicles chased Pied Harriers, a relatively uncommon winter migrant to India, until the birds weretired and did not have any stamina to fly anyfurther. It is also to be noted that some photographers are rumoured to regularly bait birds of prey with live snakes which are tied to a peg on the ground. This practice is repugnant and unethi - cal and contravenes the law. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 16 This Bluefaced Malkoha (Phaenicophaeus viridirostris),killed off-road at Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve,illustrates what could happen with overspeeding inwilderness areas (July 2011) A wider perspectiveIn geological history, plants have pioneered thecolonization of land. They setup the energyflows through the ecosystem. If the plantcover is lost, the insect community dependenton it will decline and consequently the foodavailable to birds too. This then, will lead to adecline in bird populations. The mindless actof off-road driving just to get images of rareand vagrant birds is counterproductive. Fame and popularity that photography gives topeople has to a large extent, fuelled this crazefor migrant, rare or charismatic species. Thisrace to get the rarest and the best picturecrosses the thin line between seeming igno-rance and outright wilful unethical practice. Inthe past, there have been instances of nestphotographers destroying bird nests after theirphoto-shoots to prevent others from clickingthe same. Today, nest photography is bannedin almost all nature photography competitions,repositories or social media pages. Could wetake lessons from this? Indeed, nature photog-raphy forums should be discouraging suchpractices of deliberately destroying the habitatfor the purpose of photography. They coulddiscredit any photographer who deviates fromethical practices and is caught cheating.Personal websites could be discredited next.In other parts of the world where human use ofwildlife areas for recreation is allowed, theyare strictly monitored and controlled [Forexample,13]. Walkers are expected to follow specific trails and stick to them. Gaining public support for the conservation of biodiversity is fundamental in nature conservation and man - aging human use has been one of the corner - stones in conservation science. The recentissue of Supreme Court enforcing a blanket ban on tourism in tiger reserves is an example [14]. A sad consequence of such a blanketban, which is often necessary, is that itexcludes the very people who are needed tolobby for conserving wildlife. If people follow - ing unethical practices do not correct them-selves, a blanket ban is not out of place. Therefore, regulating such recreational activi - ties is the key. Peer pressure could help great - ly in achieving this. The measures mentioned below, coupled with a strong and strict code of Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 17 conduct have worked wonders with the samewildlife-photography community in the pastand we see no reason why it should not workagain. Relevance of this studyto wilderness areaswhere tourism exists: The results from thisstudy are relevant to wilderness areas in Indiawhere vehicle tracks have been laid for wildlifesafaris and transportation. For example, theRajiv Gandhi (Nagarahole) National Park hadclose to 700 km of roads, visibility lines andfire lines in 1985 [15] which accounts to about15 % of the park area. Some of the impactsidentified from this study, especially damageto vegetation and soil caused due to move-ment of vehicles, can also be extended tothese wilderness areas. The technique used inthis study can provide a simple and cost-effec-tive way to accurately assess the impacts inthese areas. Importance of grasslands: Grasses are funda-mental in supporting and sustaining a “grass-land ecosystem”. The distribution of naturalgrasslands within Peninsular India is patchy.Very little ecological knowledge exists aboutthem in comparison to say, a forest ecosys-tem. Grasslands are often chosen targets for agricul-turural and urban devolopment. Often, grass-lands are termed as waste lands and plantedwith trees by the Government. Such changesdestroy the ecology of this fragile ecosystem. Several grassland specialist birds are foundthere (Migrants: Harriers, Falcons, Eagles,Floricans; Residents: Pipits, Larks, Quails, Partridges, Lapwings). Apart from birds, other fauna like amphibians, reptiles, mollusks and insects, including the recently rediscovered Lilac Silverline Butterfly werefound therein good numbers. A third of all birds ever recorded from Bangalore can be found in Hesaraghatta. Our city will only be the poorer if we lose such a biological - ly diverse habitat. Majority of the habitat spe - cialist species will be gone once and for all. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 18 ConclusionsFrom this rapid assessment study, it is clearthat the unregulated movement of bird photog-raphers has had a severe impact in the formof permanent vehicle tracks. The feeding andforaging activities of birds are altered if con-stantly pursued by vehicles. This imposessevere stress on the birds living there. Damage to vegetation is more severe by a mov-ing vehicle than an individual walking. Theregeneration of plants and in turn the processof succession is negatively affected by this.Several grasses and woody saplings are per-manently affected, especially in their growthphase. Studies elsewhere have shown thatthere is ample scope for such habitats torecover if provided respite from constantmovement [6]. In Hesaraghatta however, thesituation is far from it. Since 2009, when theissue of off-road driving was reported, thenumber of people indulging in it has onlyincreased. Such activities have not been limit-ed to the study site but are becoming increas-ingly common in other dry lake beds andgrasslands throughout Peninsular India.It appears that several newer entrants into pho-tography are either unaware of the damagesthey may inadvertently be causing or chooseto blatantly ignore the fact that they causedamages to the habitat and the birds whichthey intend to photograph. Several well mean-ing photographers may simply follow otherswho are indulging in off-road driving and addthe already worsening problem.Given the variability in factors leading to the problem, it becomes imperative that whatever be the mode of activity in Hesaraghatta andsimilar habitats, some form of regulation is amust. Driving on the lake bed in a vehicle isdetrimental to the habitat and it must bestopped. This rapid assessment study is only an attempt to highlight the problem with supporting evi-dence. Drawing out solutions to the com-pounded problem from this short duration study would be unjust. However, we suggest several ways to mitigate the negative impacts. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 19 Protection: theoptions availableNeed for a regulation:Clearly off road drivingon the lake bed damages the habitat andshould be stopped. Photographers need tounderstand and accept the fact that the habi-tat saved for posterity has more value than aclose up photograph. If at all one needs pho-tographs, it has to be made by walking andnot by driving and pursuing the bird. Self regulationhas seen limited success in thepast. Much of the photographers seen inHesaraghatta and similar habitats appear tobe well educated and are concerned aboutbirds. Given this assumption, we suggest thatthey show some ‘empathy’ and voluntarilyabstain from what they are doing. What isneeded is a strict conformity to a code of con-duct resulting in ethical photography. On sev-eral occasions, members of the photographercommunity have themselves proposed this.Many countries have standards which can besimply followed [See for example,16]. Need for a stakeholder committee:It may benecessary set up a panel of stakeholders tofind viable long term solutions to this problem.The panel could have as its members a fewveteran photographers, new entrants to pho-tography, ecologists, representatives of lakeusers and government. This panel should initi-ate a much more detailed study (than this)and attempt to identify means and ways of regulating the activity by providing clear guide - lines. The panel should aim to address these two questions: 1. Should vehicles be allowed at all ? 2. If yes, how many and where arethey allowed to go? Demarcation of pathways on the ground, and having no go zones on the grassland lake bed, with moral policing and public shaming of ‘offenders’ by the photographic community.The off-road driving of vehicles can be con-trolled by a second level of self regulation. Photographers deviating from such trails could be photographed and discredited on various forums where he/she uploads the photograph (For eg: India Nature Watch, Indiabirds, andother Facebook pages). Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 20 Digging a trenchalong access roads or liningthem with stone posts to create a physicalbarrier, or visible guidelines for limits on off-road driving. This will prevent any vehicle fromleaving the designated path. Any photogra-pher violating this by covering the trench orremoving the stones could be subjected tomoral policing and discredited. Policingby the Forest DepartmentandBangalore Water Supply and Sewage Board (BWSSB). Though the movement of vehicles and people in the lake bed area does not amount to trespassing, the concerned authori - ties could be involved in regulating the num - ber of vehicles entering the lake bed. Vehicle movement increases soil erosion and BWSSB has every reason to worry about turbid waters when inflow to the lake increases. ForestDepartment should come into the picture aswildlife and protected species are involved.Legal ban and protection with penalization of offenders. There is precedence for it. Photography of the Great Indian Bustard has Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 21 been banned by the forest department owingto increasing unethical practices in photo-graphing the birds in their breeding seasoncausing a constant disturbance [17]. All the birds are protected species and are cov-ered under the various clauses of the WildlifeProtection Act of 1972 and so are a few but-terflies found in Hesaraghatta. The area is alake bed, allthough dry now. India is a signato-ry to the ‘Ramsar Convention’ (Convention onWetlands of International Importance) which ithas ratified. The convention, at its heart, isbased on the philosophy of ‘wise use’. India is also a signatory to the ‘Convention onMigratory Species’, which it has also ratified.Many of the birds facing pressure from pho-tographers in Hesaraghatta are migratory.Some are not just migratory but are threat-ened migratory species too by IUCN’s listing:For example, European Roller (Coracias gar-rulous)NT; Lesser Florican (Sypheotides indi-cus) EN; Greater Spotted Eagle (Aquilaclanga) VU etc [18]. Several of the migrant birds are already losingtheir habitat in and around Bangalore.Hesaraghatta lake is one place where theyare found in sufficiently good numbers.Continued disturbance in this place will dounforeseen damage to the birds. India beingsignatory to the above mentioned treatises,can take strong legal action against the activi-ties which threaten the existence of birds andtheir habitats. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 22 Termite mounds are often a casuality of reckless driving! Apartfrom the mounds serving as perches, termites themselveshave an important role in a grassland ecosystem. Cumulative Bird ListOf Hesaraghatta and environs, compiled by SeshadriKS.Those marked with an asterisk are from [21] and therest from [20] Accipiter badius - ShikraAccipiter gentilis* - Northern GoshawkAcridotheres fuscus - Jungle MynaAcridotheres tristis - Common MynaAcrocephalus agricola* - Paddyfield WarblerAcrocephalus dumetorum - Blyth's Reed-WarblerActitis hypoleucos - Common SandpiperAegithina tiphia - Common IoraAlauda gulgula - Eastern SkylarkAlcedo atthis* - Small Blue KingfisherAmandava amandava - Red MuniaAmaurornis phoenicurus - White-breasted WaterhenAmmomanes phoenicurus - Rufous-tailed Finch-LarkAnas acuta - Northern PintailAnas clypeata - Northern ShovellerAnas crecca* - Common TealAnas penelope - Eurasian WigeonAnas poecilorhyncha - Spot-billed DuckAnas querquedula - GarganeyAnastomus oscitans - Asian Openbill StorkAnhinga melanogaster* - DarterAnthus cervinus - Red-throated PipitAnthus godlewskii* - Blyth's PipitAnthus hodgsoni* - Oriental Tree PipitAnthus richardi - Richard's PipitAnthus rufulus - Paddyfield PipitAnthus similis* - Brown Rock PipitApus affinis* - House SwiftAquila clanga - Greater Spotted EagleAquila pomarina - Lesser Spotted EagleAquila rapax - Tawny EagleArdea cinerea - Grey HeronArdea purpurea - Purple HeronArdeola grayii - Indian Pond HeronArtamus fuscus - Ashy WoodswallowAsio flammeus - Short-eared OwlAthene brama - Spotted OwletAythya ferina* - Common PochardBubulcus ibis - Cattle EgretButastur teesa - White-eyed BuzzardCacomantis passerinus - Indian Plaintive CuckooCalandrella brachydactyla - Greater Short-toed LarkCalidris minuta - Little StintCalidris temminckii - Temminck's StintCaprimulgus asiaticus - Common Indian NightjarCasmerodius albus - Large EgretCentropus sinensis - Greater CoucalCeryle rudis* - Lesser Pied KingfisherCharadrius alexandrinus* - Kentish PloverCharadrius dubius - Little Ringed PloverChlidonias hybridus - Whiskered TernChloropsis aurifrons - Gold-fronted ChloropsisChrysocolaptes festivus* - Black-shoulderedWoodpeckerChrysomma sinense* - Yellow-eyed BabblerCiconia ciconia - European White Stork Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 23 Ciconia episcopus* - White-necked StorkCircaetus gallicus - Short-toed Snake EagleCircus aeruginosus - Western Marsh HarrierCircus macrourus - Pallid HarrierCircus melanoleucos - Pied HarrierCircus pygargus - Montagu's HarrierCisticola juncidis - Streaked Fantail WarblerClamator jacobinus* - Pied Crested CuckooColumba livia - Blue Rock PigeonCopsychus saularis - Oriental Magpie RobinCoracias benghalensis - Indian RollerCoracias garrulus - European RollerCoracina macei* - Large Cuckoo-ShrikeCoracina melanoptera - Black-headed Cuckoo-ShrikeCorvus macrorhynchos - Jungle CrowCorvus splendens - House CrowCoturnix coromandelica - Rain QuailCuculus canorus* - Common CuckooCuculus micropterus* - Indian CuckooCuculus saturatus* - Oriental CuckooCypsiurus balasiensis - Asian Palm SwiftDendrocitta vagabunda - Indian TreepieDendrocygna javanica - Lesser Whistling-DuckDicaeum agile* - Thick-billed FlowerpeckerDicaeum erythrorhynchos - Tickell's FlowerpeckerDicrurus leucophaeus - Ashy DrongoDicrurus macrocercus - Black DrongoDinopium benghalense* - Lesser Golden-backedWoodpeckerDumetia hyperythra* - Rufous-bellied BabblerEgretta garzetta - Little EgretEgretta gularis - Western Reef EgretElanus caeruleus - Black-shouldered KiteEmberiza buchanani - Grey-necked BuntingEremopterix grisea - Ashy-crowned Sparrow-LarkEudynamys scolopacea - Asian KoelFalco chicquera - Red-headed FalconFalco naumanni - Lesser KestrelFalco peregrinus - Peregrine FalconFalco tinnunculus - Common KestrelFrancolinus pondicerianus - Grey FrancolinFulica atra - Common CootGalerida deva* - Sykes's Crested LarkGallinago stenura - Pintail SnipeGallinula chloropus* - Common MoorhenGyps bengalensis* - Indian White-backed VultureGyps himalayensis - Himalayan GriffonHalcyon smyrnensis - White-breasted KingfisherHaliastur indus - Brahminy KiteHieraaetus pennatus - Booted EagleHierococcyx varius* - Common Hawk CuckooHimantopus himantopus - Black-winged StiltHippolais caligata - Booted WarblerHippolais rama* - Sykes's WarblerHirundo daurica - Red-rumped SwallowHirundo fluvicola* - Streak-throated SwallowHirundo rustica - Common SwallowHydrophasianus chirurgus* - Pheasant-tailed JacanaJynx torquilla - Eurasian WryneckLanius cristatus - Brown ShrikeLanius schach - Rufous-backed ShrikeLanius vittatus - Bay-backed ShrikeLimosa limosa* - Black-tailed Godwit Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 24 Lonchura malabarica - White-throated MuniaLonchura malacca* - Black-headed MuniaLonchura punctulata - Spotted MuniaMegalaima haemacephala - Coppersmith BarbetMegalaima viridis - White-cheeked BarbetMerops orientalis - Small Bee-eaterMerops philippinus - Blue-tailed Bee-eaterMilvus migrans - Black KiteMirafra affinis - Jerdon's BushlarkMirafra cantillans - Singing BushlarkMirafra erythroptera* - Red-winged BushlarkMotacilla alba - White WagtailMotacilla cinerea - Grey WagtailMotacilla citreola - Citrine WagtailMotacilla flava - Yellow WagtailMotacilla maderaspatensis - Large Pied WagtailMycteria leucocephala - Painted StorkNectarinia asiatica - Purple SunbirdNectarinia lotenia* - Loten's SunbirdNectarinia zeylonica - Purple-rumped SunbirdNeophron percnopterus - Egyptian VultureNettapus coromandelianus - Cotton Pygmy-gooseNumenius arquata* - Eurasian CurlewNycticorax nycticorax* - Black-crowned Night HeronOcyceros birostris - Indian Grey HornbillOenanthe isabellina - Isabelline WheatearOriolus oriolus - Eurasian Golden OrioleOrthotomus sutorius - Common TailorbirdOtus bakkamoena* - Collared Scops OwlParus major* - Great TitPasser domesticus - House SparrowPavo cristatus - Indian PeafowlPericrocotus cinnamomeus - Small MinivetPernis ptilorhynchus - Oriental Honey-buzzardPhaenicophaeus viridirostris - Small GreenbilledMalkohaPhalacrocorax niger - Little CormorantPhalaropus lobatus - Red-necked PhalaropePhylloscopus trochiloides - Greenish Leaf-WarblerPitta brachyura* - Indian PittaPlatalea leucorodia* - Eurasian SpoonbillPlegadis falcinellus - Glossy IbisPloceus philippinus - Baya WeaverPluvialis fulva* - Pacific Golden PloverPorphyrio porphyrio - Purple SwamphenPrinia hodgsonii* - Franklin's PriniaPrinia inornata - Plain PriniaPrinia socialis - Ashy PriniaPrinia sylvatica - Jungle PriniaPseudibis papillosa* - Black IbisPsittacula cyanocephala* - Plum-headed ParakeetPsittacula krameri - Rose-ringed ParakeetPycnonotus cafer - Red-vented BulbulPycnonotus jocosus - Red-whiskered BulbulPycnonotus luteolus - White-browed BulbulRiparia diluta - Pale MartinRostratula benghalensis - Greater Painted-SnipeSaxicola caprata - Pied BushchatSaxicola torquata - Common StonechatSaxicoloides fulicatus - Indian RobinSpilornis cheela* - Crested Serpent EagleSterna aurantia - River TernStreptopelia chinensis - Spotted Dove Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 25 Streptopelia senegalensis - Little Brown DoveStreptopelia tranquebarica* - Red Collared DoveStrix ocellata - Mottled Wood OwlSturnia blythii - Malabar White-headed StarlingSturnia malabarica - Grey-headed StarlingSturnus pagodarum* - Brahminy StarlingSturnus roseus - Rosy StarlingSylvia curruca - Common Lesser WhitethroatSypheotides indica - Lesser FloricanTachybaptus ruficollis - Little GrebeTachymarptis melba - Alpine SwiftTadorna ferruginea* - Brahminy ShelduckTephrodornis pondicerianus* - Common WoodshrikeTerpsiphone paradisi - Asian Paradise-FlycatcherThreskiornis melanocephalus* - Black-headed IbisTreron bicincta - Orange-breasted Green PigeonTreron phoenicoptera* - Yellow-legged Green PigeonTringa glareola - Wood SandpiperTringa ochropus - Green SandpiperTringa stagnatilis - Marsh SandpiperTringa totanus* - Common RedshankTurdoides affinis - White-headed BabblerTurdoides caudatus* - Common BabblerTurdoides malcolmi - Large Grey BabblerTurdoides striatus - Jungle BabblerTurnix suscitator* - Common ButtonquailTyto alba* - Barn OwlUpupa epops - Common HoopoeVanellus indicus - Red-wattled LapwingVanellus malabaricus - Yellow-wattled Lapwing Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 26 A lark on the dry lake bed observed at the nest during the survey ReferencesReferences have not been sorted alphabeticallyor in order of usage; and formats have notbeen standardised.1. Mike Prince (2009). The good and Bad atHesaraghatta, BngBirds, msg# 15903.2. Kenneth Kershaw (1973) Quantitative andDynamic Plant Ecology, second ed. ELBS3. Ecological Succession in http://www.Wikipedia.org as accessed on 8th January4. JP Pascal, BR Ramesh (1995). Forest Mapof South India. Notes on the Bangalore-Salem sheet. The French Institute,Pondicherry.5. DP Shelton, PJ Jasa (2009). Estimating per-cent residue cover using Line-Transectmethod. University of Nebraska. Availablefrom www.extension.unl.edu/publications.6. Michael Liddle (1997) Recreation Ecology,Chapman and Hall7. WF Laurance, M Goosem, SG Laurance(2009). Impacts of roads and linear clearingson tropical forests. Trends in Ecology &Evolution 24:659-669.8. JP Pascal and BR Ramesh (1995) ForestMap of South India, Bangalore-Salem Sheet1:250,000 scale. French Institute ofPondicherry.9. Ecological Succession, Feb 2013 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_succes - sion10. RT Forman, LE Alexander (1998) Roadsand their major ecological effects. Annual review of ecology and systematics 29:207-231 11. ED Stolen (2003) The Effects of VehiclePassage on Foraging Behavior of WadingBirds. Waterbirds 26(4):429-43612. J Burger and M Gochfeld (1991) HumanDistance and Birds: Tolerance and ResponseDistances of Resident and Migrant Species in India. Environmental Conservation 18:158-16513. Provincial Parks Regulation Act, 1985,Alberta, Canada Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 27 14. Krithi K Karanth and K Ullas Karanth (2012)A Tiger in the Drawing Room Can luxuryTourism Benefit Wildlife? Economic andPolitical Weekly XLVII No. 38.15. Ranjit Lal, Ashish Kothti, Prathiba Pande,Shekar Singh; eds. (1994) Directoy of NationalParks and Sanctuaries in Karnataka:Management Status and Profile. Centre forPublic Policy, Planning and EnvironmentalStudies, Indian Institute of PublicAdministration, New Delhi.16. Ethics for Photographers.http://www.naturephotographers.net/ethics.html as accessed in December 2012.17. Ban on photography to protect the GreatIndian Bustard, Conservation India 2012.18. Wildlife Protection Act 1972 and amend-ments. Republic of India.19. International Union for Conservation ofNature and Natural Resources (IUCN). RedData Book of Birds.20. Mails on the BngBirds email discussiongroup archives (2005-2013),http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bngbirds21. Clement Francis, S Nitin, P.Manjunath(2009) Checklist of Birds of Hessarghatta,Bangalore Rural District, Karnataka, India.http://birdsofhessarghatta.blogspot.in/ Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 28 A Jackal getting chased on the lake bed. Photograph not by the authors NotesAll views expressed and information given inthis informal report are those of the authorsand not necessarily those of any institution ororganisation they are associated with.This project was completely self funded by theauthors.Pictures and maps are by the authors unlessotherwise stated.The Report is not formally edited. Keywords: recreation ecology; unethicalwildlife photography; eco-tourism regulation;road ecology; ornithology; behavioural ecology; vegetation dynamics; grasslands;man-made lakes. AcknowledgementsThe authors thank (with apologies to thosemissed) the following people who gave apatient hearing, provided suggestions, dis-cussed ideas, helped in various stages of thestudy, and generally encouraged the endeav-our. In random order: Nayeem Ullah Khan,Wilson MRE, GaneshT, PrashanthMB,Gururaja KV, ShyamalL, Anjali Pande, PremKoshy, SubramanyaS, Kalyan Varma, GeorgeAlexander, UlhasPA, HarshaJ, SwamyNR,Ravi Menon, Ramki Sreenivasan, AnandSankar, KarthikeyanS, Cheriyan Alexander,Rajneesh Suvarna, Krushnamegh Kunte,AravindNA, Vikram Hiresavi, SreeramMV,Soubadra Devy, SrinivasaTS, VishwanathS.Authors’ addresses(In alphabetical order)Gautham GS, SJC gautham.gs071@gmail.com‚.9;袀Kishan SB kishansb@gmail.com&#x-15.;é¡¢Krishna MB mbk@lavabit.com&#x-15.;é¡¢Nitin RA, SJC nitin.photography.110@gmail.com&#x-15.;é¡¢Pawan Kumar T, SJC pawan.zamba@gmail.com&#x-15.;é¡¢Piyush Daga, SJC piyushdaga4892@gmail.com&#x-15.;é¡¢Prabhakar BS, SJC bspsjc@gmail.com‚.9;袀Seshadri KS, ATREE seshadri.ali@gmail.com&#x-15.;é¡¢ Shashank Balakrishna, SJC rb.shashank@gmail.com&#x-15.;é¡¢ Sunil Kumar M poirotsunil@gmail.com&#x-15.;é¡¢Sushant Potdar, SJC sushant.potdar55@gmail.com&#x-15.;é¡¢ Venkat Narayan, SJC venkatnarayan.ms@gmail.com‚.9;袀 Vinay KS vinay245@gmail.com&#x-15.;é¡¢SJC is St Josephs’s College of Science, Bangalore. ATREE is Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology andEnvironment, Bangalore. Ruining the ecology of Hesaraghatta lake: the role of bird photographers. Page 29