Winterwatch 2021 (1 Viewer)

[Farnboro John]

Just before the Lesser Scaup?

Exactly!

John

 

[Farnboro John]

Having said that I wouldn't want you to think I didn't enjoy tonight's programme. Yesterday's I thought was on the weak side - though I enjoyed the rats - but not tonight: though I hope we've seen the last of Gillian's stuffed beaver.

John

 

[Robert Wallace]

I think Gillian is by far the best female presenter on Winterwatch. Knowledgeable and personable. May she go from strength to strength.

 

[Farnboro John]

I think Gillian is by far the best female presenter on Winterwatch. Knowledgeable and personable. May she go from strength to strength.

Gillian is OK and credit to the Watch team for giving her time to settle down, because when first brought in she was really not very good. However, she now needs more and better material to continue to improve. There really isn't anything more to say about fenced-in Beavers (except perhaps when are the fences going to be removed so they can apply their work to the entire watercourse, and other watercourses across the South-west and elsewhere?)

On the other hand Megan has shown herself an absolute natural at presenting from the off: the fact that she is now undertaking independent reporting instead of just being Chris's sidekick (though that still works) means that has been recognised.

But frankly I do not care whether the presenters are male or female - the positions should be purely on merit. The ability to present the material (and perhaps to recognise in time when the script is wrong, and correct it, instead of claiming Penduline Tits are parrotbills, or not knowing that Penduline Tits were suspected of breeding in the UK due to a nest being found over thirty years ago) is the important thing.

What they could perhaps do with is some subject-competent editors so we don't continue to get stupid anomalies like Redheads and Lesser Scaups supposedly on Minsmere scrape, to pick an obvious recent error.

I'm also starting to get irritated with the heavy emphasis on Nature as being "calming". Well-being isn't all about calming down: its about getting excited by stuff and revelling in it. Which is another reason why the current Government approach to lockdown is foolish: and I see a very dangerous development in the research being shown on Winterwatch last night. Although the researcher thought he was working on whether it is possible to bring nature to those who can't go out, our moronic Government will interpret any success as meaning nobody should go out at all as they can get nature by watching wall-to-wall Attenborough etc. This is plainly rubbish: Nature is a multi-sensory experience, in which the breeze on your cheek, the smell of the tideline/red Devon earth/fox turd on the track, sounds making up the movement of animals, birdsong, plants in the wind, as a chorus not a level-adjusted focus on one species and the fleeting nature of encounters driven by one's own alertness are all significant contributions to well-being.

Of course nature should be on the TV and available to all, but the reasons for that are far wider and deeper than well-being for the immobile; and the dangers to the rest of us of that research means it should be buried deep, as quickly as possible.

John

 

[alan kennedy]

Gillian is OK and credit to the Watch team for giving her time to settle down, because when first brought in she was really not very good. However, she now needs more and better material to continue to improve. There really isn't anything more to say about fenced-in Beavers (except perhaps when are the fences going to be removed so they can apply their work to the entire watercourse, and other watercourses across the South-west and elsewhere?)

On the other hand Megan has shown herself an absolute natural at presenting from the off: the fact that she is now undertaking independent reporting instead of just being Chris's sidekick (though that still works) means that has been recognised.

But frankly I do not care whether the presenters are male or female - the positions should be purely on merit. The ability to present the material (and perhaps to recognise in time when the script is wrong, and correct it, instead of claiming Penduline Tits are parrotbills, or not knowing that Penduline Tits were suspected of breeding in the UK due to a nest being found over thirty years ago) is the important thing.

What they could perhaps do with is some subject-competent editors so we don't continue to get stupid anomalies like Redheads and Lesser Scaups supposedly on Minsmere scrape, to pick an obvious recent error.

I'm also starting to get irritated with the heavy emphasis on Nature as being "calming". Well-being isn't all about calming down: its about getting excited by stuff and revelling in it. Which is another reason why the current Government approach to lockdown is foolish: and I see a very dangerous development in the research being shown on Winterwatch last night. Although the researcher thought he was working on whether it is possible to bring nature to those who can't go out, our moronic Government will interpret any success as meaning nobody should go out at all as they can get nature by watching wall-to-wall Attenborough etc. This is plainly rubbish: Nature is a multi-sensory experience, in which the breeze on your cheek, the smell of the tideline/red Devon earth/fox turd on the track, sounds making up the movement of animals, birdsong, plants in the wind, as a chorus not a level-adjusted focus on one species and the fleeting nature of encounters driven by one's own alertness are all significant contributions to well-being.

Of course nature should be on the TV and available to all, but the reasons for that are far wider and deeper than well-being for the immobile; and the dangers to the rest of us of that research means it should be buried deep, as quickly as possible.

John

Enjoyed this season's offering. A good effort considering the constraints. Well done to all.

 

[Farnboro John]

Enjoyed this season's offering. A good effort considering the constraints. Well done to all.

Me too, but I'm not nit-picking: accuracy is essential in wildlife matters as in any other branch of science. It's that accuracy that would lift the programme towards the flagship status it ought to hold. Today I enjoyed the Sociable Lapwing footage, but how hard would it have been to check Birdguides or RBA and ascertain that it was seen today, instead of inaccurately reporting not seen since 4 January? I want attention to detail, because if I can pick holes in the things I know about then I can't trust reporting on the things I don't know about.

That said I really enjoyed the whole series and I even wonder if the improvised nature of it forced on them by lockdown etc actually resulted in a more interesting product than putting a load of eggs into a single high-value basket would have done.

I particularly welcome the fact that the final programme tonight was not used to just rehash old footage from the series but was pretty much a standard episode, so we got more for our licence fee!

John

 

[Monahawk]

A good series this time around. I actually found myself enjoying this Winterwatch perhaps more than previous offerings in the past. Maybe this was because of the current depressing circumstances we all find ourselves in, I don't know, or maybe Winterwatch was also a welcome relief to the general fare of inane cookery/food, house makeover, 'celebrity' competition programmes that now flood mainstream TV. The seasonal Watch programmes are always welcome and always throw up new surprises. The shots of a barn owl snacking on roosting starlings on Aberystwyth pier was for me the high point. Amazing stuff!

 

[Helen O]

I don't watch it anymore, but flicking through channels I came across it last week. Apparently the viewer was asked to listen to some sounds. If the presenter had stopped talking for a nanosecond, I may have been able to hear the sound I was supposed to be listening to It defeated the object, so I switched over!