![\"The](\"http:\/\/www.stephenbolwell.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/12\/SB-041-HQ_1.\u00a9_edited-3.jpg\")
<\/a>During waking hours we are forced to make hundreds of instant decisions about the ideas we will buy into and the ideas we won\u2019t; much of this input comes directly from advertising, a medium full of contradictions where complexity and subtlety are often combined with a simplistic presentation that lures us in and then hooks our brains at a primeval level that can sometimes elicit a response more effectively than brain surgery.<\/p>\n
A person extracted from a hundred years in the past and dumped into our modern world would at once suffer visual sensory overload, especially if they were forced to deal with the full compliment of technical gadgetry that has become part of our everyday lives, and yet most of us remain surprisingly unphased by this ever increasing complexity. At no time in history have we been more savvy or aware, and yet we are frequently confronted by images that raise serious questions about what we are prepared to believe.<\/p>\n
In my mid-twenties I started making a film in the hope that it would help me get a job in television. Looking for an unusual subject I decided to work on my childhood preoccupation – reptiles and amphibians.<\/p>\n Whilst filming my chosen subject I was visited by a B.B.C. Natural History Unit producer with a background in outside broadcast -mostly covering golf. He told me that there would never be a successful film made about creatures such as frogs or snakes because nobody would want to watch it….. This was clearly a \u00a0downer and I had a mind to ask, \u2018Could there be anything less interesting than watching golf?\u2019 but before I could drive home the point, David Attenborough\u2019s \u2018Life on Earth\u2019 showed up and nothing would be the same in natural history film making again.<\/p>\n The producer of the amphibians programme, Richard Brock sought me out because he thought I might usefully film sequences for the amphibians programme, and he brought with him a far more positive attitude than his colleague. He was engaging as told me about \u2018Frogs Law\u2019, the gist of which is, amphibians are expressionless creatures that give little indication of when they are likely to do something, and only become animated when least expected. In consequence filming them can be very expensive. Sadly, I had already discovered this.<\/p>\n In the grand scheme of things my contribution to ‘Life on Earth’ would be small and initially revolve around the filming of British species, \u00a0but I \u00a0nevertheless put a great many hours into the project, mostly waiting for my cold blooded subjects to do something interesting. The film went on to become a favourite within the \u2018Life on Earth\u201d series and provided me with future opportunities to continue filming creatures that weren\u2019t cuddly, hadn\u2019t been filmed widely before and were of particular interest to me.<\/p>\n There were bad experiences of course, and I’ll never get back that week I spent trying to catch a female frog emitting her spawn… unfortunately I missed it, but there was a lot that I didn\u2019t; it\u2019s just unfortunate that I remember failure more clearly than I do success.<\/p>\n A by-product of half a lifetime of recording unusual animal activities is that I\u2019ve spent more time watching, waiting and filming \u00a0European common toads than I care to mention; and it would not be unreasonable to claim that for the most part, I know what these toads will do and even more useful, when they are likely to do it; and so much of their behaviour totters right at the edge of credulity. This then is my area of expertise and the one I have chosen to question visual believability. I could just as easily have chosen social insects – so be thankful I\u2019m not going on about ants – I\u2019Il stick with toads because they are bigger, slower and easier to photograph … But are they really slower, taking into account relative size? A question that has troubled me from an early age. I must have been an odd child, but fortunately, failed to recognise this at the time. Each of us has an area of expertise that provides us with our best possible chance to decide what is or is not true.<\/p>\n A hedge fund manager, might for example, be able to show us how to make money from something that doesn\u2019t exist whilst staying out of prison – an activity right on the limits of understanding, even for the most perceptive amongst us. Of course, it can be done, but I can\u2019t imagine how, and so it make sense for me to stick with the interesting but unlikely habits of Mr Toad. Why did the toad cross the road?<\/p>\n In early spring the urge to return to a pond (usually the pond of origin) is strong, and crossing a road is not something a toad is obliged to think much about. It just happens. When something moves across the retina of an amphibian\u2019s eye neurons fire – a fast moving fly for example will stimulate a frog to flip out his tongue with great rapidity, whereas something moving more slowly may not elicit a response. Getting close to a frog or toad in the wild without disturbing it works on the same principle – you try to avoid firing neurons in the amphibian’s brain by moving slowly.<\/p>\n Frogs and toads react to stimuli without going through the trials and tribulations of thinking, although they have the ability to remember some things well, which rather gives the impression they are thoughtful creatures.<\/p>\n They orientate sometimes better than we can, and will usually move off in the same direction whenever they are replaced in an original starting position. You might believe that Mr Toad is decision making, but this is your illusion not Mr Toad\u2019s – he\u2019s not so much a thinker as a doer. You on the other hand have confused what you are prepared to believe with what you think you know. This is the story of our lives – thinking we know, and then believing what we think we know clearly isn\u2019t the same as really knowing… but most of us just don’t know that. There is a lot going on in a toads head that we understand, but \u00a0still a lot more that we don\u2019t,\u00a0and the ability to orientate is high on the ‘not yet quite understood’ list for both reptiles and amphibians.<\/p>\n Wouldn\u2019t it be great if I had been prepared to lay on a road in the middle of the night and film common toads crossing… but of course, I never did. All of the central road shots were filmed on a set, and anytime toads were close to cars on a real road, the vehicles were driven by friends who knew exactly where the toads were, and when a toad got squashed it was always one made from plasticine. Sometimes it’s really difficult to know what to believe.<\/p>\n Amplexus is the action of a male frog or toad grasping a female, but with toads the whole thing can get out of hand when large numbers of males begin grasping a single female.<\/p>\n When common toads begin clinging on in numbers it is possible that a female will drown. At a time when these animals were far more common than they are today, I would wander around local ponds at night with a torch,\u00a0and on finding a ball of toads would remove the smaller males that weren’t really in the game, and this would give the females a better chance of surviving (I know – interfering with nature!). Occasionally, I’d find a really large female that had drowned because she had been so laden with potential partners she was unable to surface for air – the ball rolls and \u00a0males clustered around the female get to breath – It seems hardly fair, especially as the females, despite their age, are usually in good health – the selective advantage of the process is difficult to fathom.<\/p>\n Is it possible that toads become entombed in trees, only to be discovered when the tree is cut down. This isn\u2019t as ridiculous as it sounds; once a toad finds a good hidey hole, he or she may sit in such a place for months feeding on passing prey, and eventually grow too big to squeeze back out. A toad might live for years like this, grabbing invertebrates that wander in, or catching those that pass close enough with a flick of the tongue. When the tree is cut the toad is startled into action by the activity; or perhaps when a tree is cut a nearby toad jumps and gives the impression that he or she has been liberated from a tight squeeze? It all depends on what you are prepared to believe based on the available evidence, or maybe by just using your own imagination.<\/p>\n And what\u2019s the likelihood that a toad has a fitted air ride like some fancy hotrod. The answer of course is ‘close to zero’, that is until a grass snake comes by – and then a toad will do something that it never does at any other time.<\/p>\n You have more chance of being eaten by a python if you are lying down than when you are standing up. So on meeting a python more than twice my length, I always stand up. That makes good sense to me, but you can believe what you like.<\/p>\n How did toadstools get their name? Surely it must be because toads hop up onto them. The obvious consideration is that a toadstool would be too weak to support a toad, but that’s not the case. The real question is, could a toad really manage to hop up there in the first place? \u00a0Surely,\u00a0it is more likely that those monkeys, given infinite time, will type the complete works of Shakespeare long before a toad \u00a0manages\u00a0this extraordinary leap – although for us, it just requires a leap of faith.<\/p>\n What if I was expecting a visit from a naturalist who had to come through a wood, and I placed several toads upon toadstools along his route – if he saw them sitting comfortably, would he consider the activity demonstrably proven? I once managed to get 7 toads onto toadstools before the first one started to get off – and a comfy toad might stay in place for several minutes.<\/p>\n O.K. That\u2019s covered a few of the visual possibilities for toads – their response to movement and our response to what we see them doing. I guess we could start the whole story over again asking \u00a0similar questions about auditory responses. How about \u00a0ringing a bell to call Mr Toad out \u00a0from his hole for a reward of food? Does that cross the borders of what is believable? If it is of any help… it doesn’t work with snakes (and that\u2019s not because they’re stupid). \u00a0Perhaps it would though…\u00a0if we were prepared to jump up and down a bit.<\/p>\n What we find at the borders of believability, is always up to us.<\/p>\n Please remember that it is inadvisable to handle amphibians without good reason – their\u00a0absorbent\u00a0skins make them susceptible to disease – and in some cases it is now illegal to touch them.<\/em><\/p>\n Links below to two excellent and successful photographers who have assisted me in the past:<\/em><\/p>\n http:\/\/www.chrisbalcombe.com<\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>