Beth is a Sussex-based nature writer who has enjoyed writing for websites, local newspapers and monthly regional and charity magazines. She has recently completed an MA in nature and travel writing at Bath Spa University and hopes to use her new skills and experience in purpose-led PR to write about conservation and rewilding.
Warning: Viewers May Find Scenes in This Nature Programme Upsetting
My heart sank a little when a pair of magpies picked the apple tree in our back garden to nest in. The blue tits’ favourite bird box a few fence posts down was already occupied. And wood pigeons had been clumsily announcing their intention to nest with half-hearted deliveries of single twigs to a branch in the very same tree. As for the other birds that usually nested in our garden, it was too early to see whether they would be impacted by the magpies’ presence.
Our urban plot is on a busy road that has a rectangle of rear garden, a sanctuary for us humans and a seemingly favoured space for wildlife. A garden in which blackbirds and wood pigeons rest, wings sprawled, peacefully on the lawn, unconcerned by our dogs that chase away cats and foxes. A garden where stag beetles develop under rotting logs, wood mice burrow under stone piles and earthworms drag rolled-up, fallen leaves below ground. Bats, maybugs and dragonflies buzz the air, borders and pond in the balmier months.
Last Spring, as the harmonious veneer was shattered by the fight, feast and flirtation of birds entering their most crucial season, corvids and sparrowhawks dominated the takings on our patch. Magpies pillaged a blackbird’s nest, twice. Mind you, even I could see it 10 metres away. Jays stabbed huddles of freshly fledged sparrows and raiding crows criss-crossed our airspace with fluffy starlings in their beaks, noisily pursued by their panicking parents. A female sparrowhawk regularly used our garden as a hunting ground and plucked its prey on the grass. None nested in it, though. Just our usuals: blackbirds, blue tits, sparrows, robins and wrens. All the smaller birds that I actively encourage. It was no wonder, then, that predatory birds would also be attracted in.
The scenes outside our back windows were playing out in gardens across the country. And captured in full, harrowing detail by the BBC for Springwatch, much to the dismay of many viewers. A “depressing, death-filled episode” left viewers in tears with one describing what they viewed as “bullying, cannibalism, drowning, kidnapping and murder”. And “doom and gloom, devastating, and nothing but death and misery”.
So, what do we want from nature – was I, too, only wanting to view the fluffier side of nature outside my window? And what do enthusiasts, onlookers and ardent wildlife watchers wish for from natural history TV programmes? We already know that time spent in nature can improve wellbeing. But watching natural history programmes can make people happier as well, according to research the BBC commissioned in 2017.
The study played snippets of the series Planet Earth II to viewers. By using facial mapping technology that recognises emotion, they learned that even watching short clips of nature leads to significant increases in positive emotions including awe, contentedness, joy and amusement. And substantially decreases emotions such as nervousness, anxiety, fear, stress and tiredness. Great news for nature programme makers. And anyone needing to improve their mental health and ability to manage stress.
So, what of those televised scenes that don’t leave viewers feeling uplifted from the nature programmes they watch? There was no mention of whether the study included clips showing predation as well as the cuter side of nature. I can only assume for the sake of accuracy that they did. Talking to neighbours about some of the gory scenes in our own back gardens last Spring, they agreed that they would rather witness nature with “warts and all” than just see cherry-picked scenes with “ah” factor, whether on TV or in real life. And as the BBC launched the Real Happiness Project to promote the benefits of connectivity with nature on the strength of their report we must conclude the majority of viewers would agree.
Despite lots of past complaints, BBC Springwatch still shows the harsher realities of nature but now gives viewers much starker warnings. When an episode featured an adder attacking a nest of chicks in June this year, presenter Chris Packham anticipated the upset the scene may cause. He said:
“Some things are absolutely fascinating, and our duty, of course, is to report all of this to you and to show you what is really happening out here. We tell you the complete truth. Sometimes, however, the truth is quite hard to swallow.”
Of the feedback that was published, it seemed the warning prompted a far more balanced response between viewers who found the programme hard to watch and those that commented on survival in nature and the “cycle of life”.
When the magpies moved into our apple tree this year, I feared the worst for the regular species of nesters I had come to expect each Spring. But there was surprising calm. The blue tits relocated to an empty mid-terrace sparrow box on the side of the house and other birds seemingly avoided nesting nearby altogether. A family of wrens I only noticed once fledged had clearly stayed under the radar of any corvids. The magpies’ nest, however, attracted a lot of unwanted attention from the neighbourhood crows. A year on, the hunters had become the hunted.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mark Avery writes: if you’d like to write a guest post for this site then here is some guidance (well I say guidance – really these are instructions):
- I will need your words (in a .doc(x) file) which includes some information about yourself (see what Beth said about herself – something like that) and an image of yourself (ideally .jpg or .png) sent as a separate attachment (ie not, that is NOT, embedded in the Word file).
- the subject of your post should be related to nature and/or wildlife
- I might well publish views with which I don’t agree if they are expressed well
- what you send me should be what you think is the final (yes FINAL) text. Contributors who ‘just want to tweak this a bit’ may get short shrift.
- I may correct typos but I probably won’t correct spelling mistakes or grammatical errors – they are your responsibility (as mine are my responsibility)
- any length is acceptable – at least to me, but you should be thinking of the reader and their tolerances
- rudeness or libel (or possible libel) will make me far less likely to publish your piece
- if you send me pictures (.jpg or .png please) to illustrate your post then please confirm that you have permission to use them and credit the photographer/artist
- if accepted for publication I will let you know when your writing will be published and I will Tweet it to my alleged 52k followers on Twitter for as long as I remain on that platform. I will also provide a link to your post in my next free monthly newsletter which is read by c5000 people (and rising).
Thank you for an interesting post, Beth.
Predators (at least those preying on fluffy/cute creatures) seem to provide a challenge to many peoples’ concept of nature. People either prefer a sort of Disneyfied view in which death is at most a remote theoretical possibility that we should never see or (especially in the case of many involved in game management) they insist that predators are always ‘out of balance’ and need ‘controlling’. It is important for people to understand, though, that predation is natural, and a vital element of healthy ecosystems.
If Springwatch needs to include tactful warnings prior to showing examples of predation, so be it, but I do hope that they and other tv nature programmes continue to recognise the need to show nature as it is rather than as some might wish it to be.
Thank you for your comments, Jonathan, I completely agree.
A really interesting piece Beth.
Thank you, Amanda, much appreciated.