chrisjpainter Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 I know it's been a cracking series and as usual the filming's been top notch, especially with the classic Attenborough narration. But why have the British Isles been so roundly ignored? We're an island nation, yet got completely missed off the Islands programme. Now we're looking at cities, and they've gone to New York to film segments on urban peregrines, when they could have done it all in a load of cities here at home. So many missed opportunities to get British people to get interested in British wildlife. But no, because it seems it's not really good enough to get the full Planet Earth treatment It only goes to perpetuate the myth that Britain's wildlife isn't worth knowing about. I can only feel that this is going to result in more and more disconnect from the natural world for people here. No one is going to bother to be interested in it if it's not seen as worth filming outside of Springwatch, which is so banal these days! rant over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herby Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 What a silly rant!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 They used New York because it has the highest concentration of Peregrines anywhere on the planet, and proves the point that cities can provide exceptional habitats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjpainter Posted December 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 They used New York because it has the highest concentration of Peregrines anywhere on the planet, and proves the point that cities can provide exceptional habitats. and I can see the logic in it, to an extent. but Planet Earth shouldn't be about the biggest or the best or the most. But London's peregrines have an equally exceptional habitat, as do the birds in Coventry, Lincoln and Birmingham. In the big series of old done by the BBC, there would always be some stuff about British wildlife, but that was painfully absent this time. I've just finished a masters in Wildlife Management and Conservation (graduated on friday - Hurrah) and at the beginning of the course for the last 15 years, they've given the new students a photo test of 100 UK animals and plants to do to test initial knowledge. over that time the results have declined consistently - people in this country are becoming more and more ignorant of their own country's natural world. Flagship wildlife series neglecting the UK is only going to make that worse. They used New York because it has the highest concentration of Peregrines anywhere on the planet, and proves the point that cities can provide exceptional habitats. and I can see the logic in it, to an extent. but Planet Earth shouldn't be about the biggest or the best or the most. But London's peregrines have an equally exceptional habitat, as do the birds in Coventry, Lincoln and Birmingham. In the big series of old done by the BBC, there would always be some stuff about British wildlife, but that was painfully absent this time. I've just finished a masters in Wildlife Management and Conservation (graduated on friday - Hurrah) and at the beginning of the course for the last 15 years, they've given the new students a photo test of 100 UK animals and plants to do to test initial knowledge. over that time the results have declined consistently - people in this country are becoming more and more ignorant of their own country's natural world. Flagship series neglecting the UK is only going to make that worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobt Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 I was watching a kite over Tadcaster the other day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 But it was the POINT that mattered in this instance. I do agree, though, with the lack of knowledge regarding British wildlife from a largely urban population, but if you ain't interested, ya not going to know or be bothered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herby Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 Congratulations on passing. I think as said above the location used was the highest population and dramatic scenery. London can't compete with the amount of birds or synthetic cliffs (sky scapers) so New York wins and a better chance of action to boot. When they feaature Seaguls stealing chips out of your hand I am sure Blackpool will be right up there:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pigeon Shredder. Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 I was watching a kite over Tadcaster the other day.I was flying mine in Galleywood on Saturday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr D Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 (edited) The harvest mice were all filmed in Norfolk. Edited December 11, 2016 by Dr D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me matt Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 Dumb rant 😂 Never ever bloody ever question Attenborough !!! Got it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjpainter Posted December 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 Dumb rant Never ever bloody ever question Attenborough !!! Got it? at uni, on my course, we did a quick-fire poll of a load of celebrated wildlife connected television personalities, with the option of Conservationist or con-artist (someone who seems conservation-minded but is really not much more than just faking it!) the opinions on Attenborough was not 100% for the conservationist... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 chrisjpainter - I seem to be in a minority, but you have a valid point. As for "dumb rant" - idiot springs to mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 The OP makes a valid point and I can understand the more adult answers to his question. One point I will add, if you were tasked to film urban peregrines, would you choose Coventry or New York? These temendously tallented cameramen would naturally choose the trip away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulnix Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 The OP makes a valid point and I can understand the more adult answers to his question. One point I will add, if you were tasked to film urban peregrines, would you choose Coventry or New York? These temendously tallented cameramen would naturally choose the trip away. Agree though is probably more the production team than those actually working. Sneaking suspicion that it was probably easier to get permission to film over there than over here as well, think back to other things you see and the USA seem to like people to use their footage for events so make it free you use, probably got help to film in NY where London would of been full of jobsworths making themselves important doing H&S reports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Yes indeed, you make some valid points Paul. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 (edited) I know the series is "produced" by the BBC but there is no way they have the time or budget to shoot the footage. That would all be bought in from small independent film makers who can now shoot in incredible digital quality and just leave the camera running because they can delete the 99.9% unwanted footage. The idea of having an entire BBC film crew out there would be off the scale. Some of the independent film makers spend years living in a tent on a remote hillside to get what you see in a ten second sequence. But when they do its worth it to them financially. Its a risky business, but I could see some of the people on here doing similar. So the BBC have to use what is available. You have to understand what "produced" means, they didn't say it was "made" by the BBC. But its a cracking series and it will sell around the world for many years and the little film makers will be earning royalties for the rest of their lives. Edited December 12, 2016 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 I think that it is down to most of our wild life has been done to death ie spring watch autumn watch etc etc I do not think that there is much more to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Equally, I was amazed they went all the way to India to film Leopards in an Indian city when they could have filmed the Beast of Bodmin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjpainter Posted December 12, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Equally, I was amazed they went all the way to India to film Leopards in an Indian city when they could have filmed the Beast of Bodmin. Secretly, I'd love to see all our various big cat beasts get the full BBC Natural History treatment. I think that'd be a great use of license payers' money. just to solve the thing once and for all. Then do one on the Loch Ness Monster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bb Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Possibly made as much (or even more) for export as home consumption so give Johnny foreigner something of his own country to buy into? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Money is no object when it comes to what the licence payer will fork out. I can imagine the boardroom discussion beforehand. "Shall we go to Mauritius to film these seagulls, or Clacton?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B25Modelman Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 The snakes ambushing the Marine Iguanas got me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digger Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 "coming for a beer Fred ?" "Nah, sorry mate, I've got to hand feed the hyenas" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 I do not think that I would like to live in a place where those gurt big monkeys are charging over the roofs pulling on the electric wires I do not think my sat dish would last long there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanj Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Money is no object when it comes to what the licence payer will fork out. I can imagine the boardroom discussion beforehand. "Shall we go to Mauritius to film these seagulls, or Clacton?" Such cynicism in one so young Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.