Eye-to-Eye
National Geographic's cover story in their August 2011 edition featuring the Spirit Bear has made these rare black bears both "fashionable" and almost "cool". The article also made me think "hey, I have lots of Spirit Bear images I have never posted on NPN" - so here ya go! But don't worry...I won't be filling the gallery with Spirit Bear shots!
These extremely rare white bears (most authorities peg their number at between 200 and 300 individuals) are actually a coat colour variant of the "common" American Black Bear (
Ursus americana). The white coat colour is produced by a recessive gene and theoretically Spirit Bears COULD pop up anywhere. Why almost all of them are found (and why the recessive gene is in such high frequency) in one small portion of the central British Columbia coast remains a bit of a mystery. In that region between 10 and 20% of the black bears have the white coat colour.
Each autumn I lead photo tours into the region the Spirit Bear calls home and provide a small group of photographers (6 per trip) with the opportunity to view and photograph these very unique bears. One of the things I have noticed over my years of photographing Spirit Bears is how darned hard it is to capture a good view (or photograph) of the eye of a Spirit Bear. Between the dark forest they're traditionally found in, the fact that they tend to have dark eyes, AND the fact that they tend to have fuller eyelashes than their black-coated brethren, it can be REALLY, REALLY tough to get a shot of Spirit Bear with a catch-light in its eye.
Back in 2009 the group of photographers I took in had some shooters in it that were just a tad competitive. We were fortunate enough to find a few Spirit Bears that were fishing. Well...you can guess where that lead to - before long it wasn't good enough to capture a shot of a Spirit Bear with its eye in focus and showing a catch-light - the new goal became capturing an image of a Spirit Bear with eye in focus showing a catch-light AND with a salmon in its mouth AND with the salmon's eye in focus AND showing a catch-light. Sheesh - I guess just capturing an image of one of the world's rarest bears simply isn't good enough anymore!
Anyway... being a totally non-competitive guy myself (yeah, right...) I have no idea who won the "Spirit Bear eye AND salmon eye in focus" contest. But...here ya go guys...try this one of for size!
Subject: Spirit Bear (
Urus americana kermodei) with a very fresh meal!
Location: Great Bear Rainforest, BC, Canada
Camera: Nikon D3
Lens: Nikkor 600mm f4 VRII lens supported on carbon fibre Gitzo 1348 tripod with Wimberley head
Exposure: 1/320s @ f5.6; ISO 200. -0.67 stop compensation from matrix-metered exposure setting.
Crop: Major - this is only about 60% of original image
All the gory details about this shot (processing details, conservation, etc.)
http://www.naturalart.ca/galleries/mammals/bears/detail_92.html.
Comments and critiques welcomed - probably best to view the larger version prior to doing so!
Cheers...thanks for looking...
Brad
Comments
22 commentsI can imagine your frustration - I think it's that way with any subject we are privileged to photograph quite often, be they rare or not. Some South African photographers living and working in the Sabi-Sands push themselves and come up with amazingly creative shots of Leopards, mostly because they see them everyday and have too many 'stock-standard' shots to count.
By the way I love that the salmon's face is also very much part of the scene and well placed.
Chris
Thanks for the feedback - a few specific responses:
1. Morkel - RE: your comment "I can imagine your frustration..."
No frustration - all in good fun. And, I was probably the instigator of the "competition"!
2. Chris - RE: "Would this recessive gene be what is referred to as Leucistic?"
I've never heard - or found a reference - to Spirit Bears being referred to as suffering from leucism (AKA leukism) - I use the term "disorder" because it is normally considered a pigment disorder. I also haven't heard the recessive genes in Spirit Bears that cause the white coat colour as leucistic. However, I suspect many use this term simply as a descriptor of any genes producing a white (non-albino) coat colour, so if you want to call it leucistic I doubt anyone would call you wrong!!
3. Guy - RE: "To my eye there seems to be a hazy film...". Good catch. Shot thru very foggy/misty air with 600mm lens - which is what produced what you're referring to. This image took a lot of contrast work to MOSTLY kill the "film" you speak of, but couldn't get rid of it all.
4. Vincent - RE: "Is this image on NG's cover?" Nope. That shoot was Paul Nicklen's gig. I know it was suggested to them to use this shot as the cover image, but that didn't happen...(and probably couldn't, given the aspect ratio - or format - of that image).
Cheers...
Brad
Congrats and thanks for sharing.
D&L
Nice close up with the bear in action!
Clinton
Ken Archer
Thanks...and a few more specific responses:
1. Clinton and Neal: No disagreement on the DOF - could have used a little more and definitely had ISO "to give". But, to be honest, was shooting something else in another direction (a black-colour black bear) and caught this action out of the corner of my eye - so it was spin and shoot (quite literally) and live with my settings. Fortunately I was kneeling in the stream and was well-positioned for a decent shot...
2. Robbie: RE: the proposed selective advantage for the white coat colour (enhanced fishing success as per the NG article) and your question: " The implication is that they get more food and over time persist on the landscape at higher rates which could account for higher recessive gene (occurrence) rates??"
Yes, that's the argument. But, I was there when they were doing the fieldwork on that study and have followed it fairly closely - I'd say this proposed reason for the prevalence of the bears here is speculative at best. Going from an observed small difference in a learned behaviour (fishing) in a FEW bears to calling the coat colour the reason for the enhanced fishing success (and then extending that to enhanced reproductive success) and then arguing that's a selective advantage (in evolutionary terms) is a pretty big leap. Many alternate explanations exist (such as the fact that the natives didn't hunt the white bears, hid them from the world, and even today they can't be hunted while the black-coated ones can be - and are - killed by hunters). I could list a number of "holes" in the "enhanced fishing success" argument (such as "why only in the one small region - why aren't there Spirit Bears in the whole Great Bear Rainforest"?), but at least the suggestive study did point in an area where more research is needed...
Anyway...at this point I think the prevalence of the white coat colour in this one region ONLY is still pretty much a mystery!
Cheers...
Brad
Fantastic image, will have to get back there.
cheers,
André