E. McAvoy

Wildlife photographer update


Fantastic Fungi :Noone at Eon productions can object to magical mushrooms, surely?

The Foraging Photographer posted an update to her blog explaining a little more about the situation, we have updated our original story to reflect this.

From what we have read it does not seem the Military Byelaws in place at Hankley Common actually cover what the MPs were trying to enforce. While it is true some MOD sites have byelaws that do prohibit professional photography as The Foraging Photographer indicates, however it does not appear the Hankley 1978 Military Bylaws cover any of this. Besides even if it does the MOD Byelaw would only cover professional photography. Of course all of this is our opinion, it doesn’t hold much sway with those who already tried to prosecute someone whose only crime appears to be getting the attention of the someone high up the movie company’s chain of command.

As other a few sites have pointed out this is not the first time in the last few weeks Bond fans have apparently been intimidated by an arm of the production company.

We would hope EON takes a moment to reflect on the action taken, whether it was at their behest or not, and maybe do the right thing. Perhaps offering a VIP pass to the family for the last days of shooting to make up for it.

Our best wishes to Lucy and her family. (Oh, today’s photos were a selection of the Fantastic Fungi! :mrgreen: )

Discuss this in our forum; Wildlife Photographer in trouble for Skyfall Pics


Edited to add:

I just want to make very clear that I did not at any point go anywhere that the public were not free to go, nor was I at any point asked not to take photographs. I did not at any point go inside any fences around the structures which were up during construction. Once the fences were removed, I assumed the boundary to be the ‘flooring’ around the sites (the plastic roadway stuff that protects the ground underneath). Only once did I set foot on that flooring, and that was with permission. There was full public access to the site throughout construction (it’s MoD land), and lots of members of the public taking photos and videos. It was only during filming that the security guys were present. I do feel that if the chapel site was such hot property, then the production team should have made the construction team very aware of this, and put security on the site. It’s not like I was skulking around – I was there with two loud children and a dog!

I was told by the military policeman that I had breached a military byelaw, copies of which are displayed onsite. This is the byelaw in question;

It is prohibited to…  4(13) deposit or distribute, or cause to be deposited or distributed any handbills, leaflets or other literature or printed matter of any description.

All this seems to revolve around the fact that the mailonline bought 8 of my pictures to go into the artice that had already gone up on their site. At the gate I was told  that it’s to do with ‘commercial gain’ and that if I hadn’t received money for the pictures then they wouldn’t have been able to stop me blogging. I don’t know how that relates to the byelaw though. It’s all a bit mystifying really and not at all worth the £200 the mail paid me.


MOD Byelaws


  2 comments for “Wildlife photographer update

  1. March 20, 2012 at 5:19 am


    I genuinely loved this brilliant article. Please continue this awesome work.

  2. Maxi
    March 21, 2012 at 9:46 am

    Hello, I wanted to take time to make a comment and say I have really enjoyed reading your site.

Leave a Reply