Bird Watching Magazine (1 Viewer)

marting · Jun 3, 2004

I found this months issue very poor. There are only two articles one on raptors and the other on the re-introduction of Great Bustards. In my opinion not good enough in a magazine that has 98 pages. Corrrect me if Im wrong but the Id insights on chats has been covered in the last 12 months. Lets hope next months is an improvement.

Martin :C

mountain man · Jun 3, 2004

I don't rate either of the high street magazines. I think they are mainly catalogues for optics companies and shops nowadays. They are mostly filled with trivial crap and half arsed articles. Birdwatch is even worse. That tries to be very high browed with features on taxonomy and "upper class" ID articles and then has such mind numbing trash as"Gutter Snipe" and persists in printing childish arguments in the letters pages which most birders don't even have a clue as to what they are about.

Did you see this months Gutter Snipe? Apparently Steve "Ticker" Gantlett got married in secret. WOW!!!!!!!!! God I must remember to buy next months rivetting read.

Stick to Birding World and British Birds.

Andy Bright · Jun 3, 2004

I recieved this in an e-mail today from someone reasonably prominent in the birding industry.

I am still amazed at the amount of traffic on the site, the variety of topics as well as the knowledge of products that exists – I certainly believe that the information passed around on the site is more valuable than any published in magazines, the opinions are all based on the ownership of products and how they genuinely perform in the field.

mountain man · Jun 3, 2004

Sorry Andy, I meant stick to Birding World, British Birds AND Birdforum!

pduxon · Jun 3, 2004

tom mckinney said:
Did you see this months Gutter Snipe? Apparently Steve "Ticker" Gantlett got married in secret. WOW!!!!!!!!! God I must remember to buy next months rivetting read.

Uh ? Who?

HH75 · Jun 3, 2004

Hi Pete,

pduxon said:
Uh ? Who?

What?Shame on you...!

Harry

Gordon · Jun 3, 2004

Bird Watching Magazine(s)

I must admit that while I agree with what's being said I still keep buying both magazines - its a case of anythings better than nothing until BB arrives.

Having said that BB quite often contains articles that are of no relevance/interest - but what the hell!!

I disagree with the last post in that overall I think Birdwatch is the better of the 2!!

regards
Gordon

Edward woodwood · Jun 3, 2004

only BB for me.....everything else is just rehashed stuff or things u can get elsewhere
if you've read any of the mags for two or three years you get the idea........

Birding World articles seem to be almost entirely focussed on splitting species to get more ticks......may look daft in years to come if the taxonomic vogue changes. And a list of what has been seen where in west pal last month holds little interest at all.

You could always try OSME or OBC etc.....much cheaper at £15 (over 300 pages a year for OBC with only about 4 pages of ads....the rest is conservation/science and birding articles and photos of interesting species). The next OBC pub. is a relaunch of the bulletin....new title.....new format...more content...more colour and all monies go entirely to conservation of some of the world's most threatened birds.....no padding on how to tell chiffs from willows or endless lists of bins......

Andy Bright · Jun 3, 2004

tom mckinney said:
Sorry Andy, I meant stick to Birding World, British Birds AND Birdforum!

That's better, Tom ....and at least we're not a month out of date when you get us, Keep birding live

I was just illustrating that even the birding industry seems to be realising that magazines are quite limited in many respects. Real birders in real time from all over the world is hard to beat once the formula is nailed down ...hopefully, we're getting there.
Regards,
Andy

Edward woodwood · Jun 3, 2004

was just saying that to Harry, Andy. Bird Forum is great for the informal, popular stuff for a general birding audience which is what we all are at a certain time of the day at least.

The regional societies pubs carry more informative articles, less geared to ticking and identification with more of a scientific bent - indeed Forktail the OBC journal is a world respected publication. The monthlies cant compete with the regionals on that basis and they cant really compete with BF and others on the flipside of things, as Birding World has the 'heavier' side of listing down pat with its excellent taxonomic articles by Andreas Helbig and Martin Collinson among others....and occasionally someone going by the name Hussey (who he?) while BB has the conservation/ID and behavioural/taxo aspects of West Pal stuff covered. Plus BF has a few 'experts' who would never be so vain as to call themselves that!

and don't forget World Birdwatch from BirdLife International - a truly excellent magazine focussing on the threatened birds of the world and what is being done to help them

Fortunately for us, BF seems able to cover most aspects of birding in a humourous entertaining, educational and informative manner (£20 will do Andy!)

HH75 · Jun 3, 2004

Hi all,
Ashamed to be included in a list of luminaries such as Helbig and Collinson:have only written(or co-written) TWO articles for BW,and neither of those was a weighty ID paper!
Having being shamed into commenting here,I might add that whatever magazine one chooses to get is up to them.I personally get Birding World,and am thinking of subscribing to British Birds as well.Dutch Birding is also very good,but at least half of it is in Dutch!I rarely get Birdwatch these days(though there can be good articles in there at times),and have always found Birdwatching to be a bit...'not for me'!
Might I also lament the late 'Irish Birding News'/'Irish Birdwatching':this magazine was quite good,seeing as how nothing with a peculiarly Irish flavour is now available outside of the IBN mailing group,and that's hardly the same as a mag.
Harry

Edward woodwood · Jun 3, 2004

Yes, H. Dutch Birding is excellent too
Rene Pop who does their images is amazing. They have a very good website too - the CDNA commitee publishes its work on there and it's interesting inded to read plus there's a few sounds etc.....(something for BF one day?)

I get BB and BW and enjoy em both plus I'm fortunate to be able to read several others like NBC, OSME, Alula, Dutch Birding etc.....alll very fine but not enough hours in a day to get them all regularly

deboo · Jun 3, 2004

Must admit...
Since joining this excellent Forum, I ain't bought a Birding Magazine!
It's much more 'immediate' on here, and for my level of Birding, there is more than enough to keep me going...plus you get to talk to some 'Big Hitters' too...
Not naming any names!

Dave.

Andy Bright · Jun 3, 2004

Tim Allwood said:
was just saying that to Harry, Andy. Bird Forum is great for the informal, popular stuff for a general birding audience which is what we all are at a certain time of the day at least.

The regional societies pubs carry more informative articles, less geared to ticking and identification with more of a scientific bent - indeed Forktail the OBC journal is a world respected publication. The monthlies cant compete with the regionals on that basis and they cant really compete with BF and others on the flipside of things, as Birding World has the 'heavier' side of listing down pat with its excellent taxonomic articles by Andreas Helbig and Martin Collinson among others....and occasionally someone going by the name Hussey (who he?) while BB has the conservation/ID and behavioural/taxo aspects of West Pal stuff covered. Plus BF has a few 'experts' who would never be so vain as to call themselves that!

and don't forget World Birdwatch from BirdLife International - a truly excellent magazine focussing on the threatened birds of the world and what is being done to help them

Fortunately for us, BF seems able to cover most aspects of birding in a humourous entertaining, educational and informative manner (£20 will do Andy!)

The current BF is still evolving ...most members are the typical birder, and therefore the posts refect this but there's no limits on the scope of the site.

Whatever you want, we'll create it for you. We can have a template up and running in no time and you can have a whole section devoted to more serious and scientific aspects of birding, participation in terms of posting can be 'on application' and in effect it will be a site of it's own... the talent is out there on BF as far as writers and contributors go. It only needs a handful of active members to get the ball rolling and it's influence will grow and grow.

As I said, there's no limit to the range of subjects covered by us ... it just takes a few to get it started and we'll ensure they are the best scientifically orientated birding forums there are, with all the bells and whistles that you'd expect from us.

Think about it... it could be the start of something important and eventually unify all these minor (and outdated) listservers into a single and definitive online reference.

Regards,
Andy

Johnny1 · Jun 3, 2004

I recently cancelled my subscription for the Bird Watching magazine after 9 years. I got fed up at reading repetetive articles. The content of the magazine has greatly deteriated over the last few years, one has only to read some of the older back issues to see what I mean.

John Cantelo · Jun 3, 2004

Birdwatching? British Birds? Birdwatch? Birding World? Bird Forum?

I gave up on Birdwatching a good few years back. Without sounding too arrogant (which means I'm about to be impossibly big headed), I found it too basic and rarely had any real 'meat' for a long time enthusiast. Yet, contra various comments, I still find the optics reviews therein an interesting read. Generally I only bother to get a copy if I'm off on holiday & want a 'disposable' magazine to read on the plane. However, in my view, for a beginner/modest birder, it has plenty of interest and serves it's market pretty well. It just isn't the market of which I'm part. If it was that bad it wouldn't keep selling!

British Birds can be grindingly dull, but I've been taking the darn thing since 1962 (I was a precocious child) and can't give up now. Every year it has a handful of articles that the other magazines simply wouldn't carry. Birding World has stolen some of the old girl's thunder, but arguably it remains the most authoritative magazine of all.

Although some issues are better than others, as far as I'm concerned Birdwatch rarely disappoints. Personally, I like the balance and mix of articles although I miss the excellent columns that Bill Oddie and Anthony McGeehan (only outshone by Mrs McGeehan's occasional contributions). The articles, I find, are informative & well written. It tries hard, given the limitations of print media, to be topical and deserves credit for its campaign on Cliffe (and other issues). For me it is light years ahead of its other 'high street' rival, Birdwatching.

Birding World, again, I often find variable in quality, but generally a good read. Yes, it is too prone to be rather "split happy" and at times I find its coverage somewhat jejune. However, who can complain about a magazine that has been responsible for some real cutting edge ID articles and the mind blowing illustrations that have accompanied them?

Then there's Bird Forum, the new kid on the block. It has, of course, more flexibility and topicality of any of the print based media. The discussions of some topics (esp. optics) have been first rate and it's always useful to get up to date gen on places you might be planning to visit. The disadvantage (and advantage) of the medium is the lack of editorial control; any damn fool can post messages and usually does. Hence it's pretty much inevitable that, of all the "magazines" discussed thus far, Bird Forum has, by a large margin, the highest 'dross rate'. I find 95% of the postings banal and boring (just as 99.9% will find my contributions inane & pointless). I mean, why can't some of these folks who post pictures of perfectly identifiable birds go out a buy a damn field guide! It's quite easy really, just do a bit of research & think for yourself. Endlessly depending on the opinions of others mean you'll never learn. 'Gutter snipe' might be scurrilous, but who the hell cares if Joe Bloggs from Timbuctu has just joined BF, particularly if they couldn't identify their way out of a paper bag? And, come to that, isn't Mr Bright's self congratulatory comments just a tad vulgar. (Just don't accuse me of not trying to provoke everyone!)

Enough of trying to be provocative! The point is that what I find endlessly fascinating, the next person finds unutterably dull. It's all a matter of horses for courses. Instead of berating this or that magazine for its dullness and repetitiveness, lets celebrate the fact that here in the UK we now have 4 or 5 magazines (inc. Birds Illustrated which I've never seen, not to mention the RSPB's 'Birds') plus Bird Forum devoted to our hobby. Back in the 60s, and for the next few decades, it was 'British Birds' or nothing. Given that 'nothing' just ain't an option and that 'BB' nearly went under, the situation today, warts and all, is much the more preferable,

John

Bubbs · Jun 3, 2004

John Cantelo said:
Birdwatching? British Birds? Birdwatch? Birding World? Bird Forum?

I find 95% of the postings banal and boring (just as 99.9% will find my contributions inane & pointless). I mean, why can't some of these folks who post pictures of perfectly identifiable birds go out a buy a damn field guide! It's quite easy really, just do a bit of research & think for yourself. Endlessly depending on the opinions of others mean you'll never learn.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

John,

Perhaps some of us aren't as bright as you, and no doubt you find my few contributions banal and boring.

We all have to 'start' sometime and somewhere. If we use the experience of others, then so be it. Who knows, some of our members and guests may be elderly, young, dyslexic, or suffer from learning difficulties, etc. And if they are elderly, young, dyslexic or suffer learning difficulties, then more the merrier I say. If they can't identify a House Sparrow from an American Robin, so what; lets help them along the way. I could go on but I just find your comments hurtful to those who are not as fortunate as you.

John Barclay.

pduxon · Jun 3, 2004

John, I think you've missed John's point - well I do hope you have!!

deboo · Jun 3, 2004

I reckon John Cantelo has raised some valid points..
The 'Hi, I'm from' ..posts are getting too dull to respond to..
I dunna want to spend my evening saying 'Hi' to folk who are here and then gone.
I post a fair bit of crap...but if the site was totally Bird orientated...would it be as successful??
I think John was trying to be constructive...don't knock him...the 1 thing that is great about being on BF is....You CAN have an opinion...

Dave.

christineredgate · Jun 3, 2004

john barclay said:
John Cantelo said:

Birdwatching? British Birds? Birdwatch? Birding World? Bird Forum?

I find 95% of the postings banal and boring (just as 99.9% will find my contributions inane & pointless). I mean, why can't some of these folks who post pictures of perfectly identifiable birds go out a buy a damn field guide! It's quite easy really, just do a bit of research & think for yourself. Endlessly depending on the opinions of others mean you'll never learn.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

John,

Perhaps some of us aren't as bright as you, and no doubt you find my few contributions banal and boring.

We all have to 'start' sometime and somewhere. If we use the experience of others, then so be it. Who knows, some of our members and guests may be elderly, young, dyslexic, or suffer from learning difficulties, etc. And if they are elderly, young, dyslexic or suffer learning difficulties, then more the merrier I say. If they can't identify a House Sparrow from an American Robin, so what; lets help them along the way. I could go on but I just find your comments hurtful to those who are not as fortunate as you.

John Barclay.

Click to expand...

John B yes you are correct,and John C may I say you are perhaps slightly small minded.Have you ever really studied a Bird ID book,are the colours of the bird plumage really 100% spot on.It can be difficult for novices.Many moons ago I submitted an image of a Godwit,this was a digiscoped image taked from a great distance,it took the experts(Michael Francis and co) quite some time to assess the species,which in fact turned out to be an Icelandic juvenile.Not an easy feat.
Some of the Forum members really do surpass in ID skills,and I am sure they do not mind educating the lesser educated one amongs't us.Also,at times ID'ing can be difficuly due the great number of hybrid birds which seem to be cropping up.
You don't have to read a thread if you think it boring etc.Yes,there are many new members joining the Forum,and yes, it can be quite time consuming saying hello to everyone,but these people have joined ,they have introduced themselves,so it is only polite to say a quick hello and make them feel welcome.If no one joined,then there would be no Forum.

Bird Watching Magazine (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Guest

Administrator

Guest

Quacked up Member

Well-known member

Registered User

Member

Administrator

Member

Well-known member

Member

.............

Administrator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Quacked up Member

.............

Winner of the Copeland Wildlife Photographer of th

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread