Springwatch is back, the BBC’s largest outside broadcasting event with regular audiences approaching 4 million. I’m among its greatest fans, having watched every series – and spin-offs, Autumnwatch and Winterwatch – since it began in 2005. But this year I’ve begun to worry about the gulf opening up between the wonderful richness on the screens and the urgent biodiversity crisis unfolding off camera.
Springwatch’s unique contribution to wildlife programming is its emphasis on citizen science. The audience is encouraged to observe and submit data about their gardens and local spaces, a model of environmental engagement. But deep down, Springwatch is rooted in the Attenborough tradition of nature programming: intimate stories of wildlife, focusing on nature’s eternal beauty and fascinating behaviours. What’s missing is coverage of the human pressures on their habitat. David Attenborough has only relatively recently addressed the massive threats to nature from human destruction, pollution and climate change.
The conservation defence for presenting wildlife in closeup, excluding issues of human impact, is that the intimate focus triggers a love of nature that motivates its protection. But something doesn’t stack up here. Since the 60s, British broadcasting has been the world leader in nature programming, with incredible photography, storytelling, research and brilliant presenters. So we should also be world leaders in conservation. Yet a recent WWF report showed the UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. Among declines too numerous to list, a quarter of Britain’s mammals are now at risk of extinction, including the hedgehog, the water vole and the wildcat. Farmland birds have declined by 50% since the 70s. Shockingly, the UK is in the global bottom 10% in terms of remaining biodiversity.
The report puts the leading cause of extinction down to the “catastrophic impact” of humans on habitats. Wildlife habitats have been destroyed by agricultural practices, woodland clearance, and the industrialising of countryside by house and road building and infrastructure projects. The Conservative party’s loosening of the planning system and developer bias have escalated this situation from poor to perilous. A new map created by the Community Planning Alliance shows the sheer scale of the current assault on the countryside. In a matter of months more than 400 campaigns registered to protest against the destruction of ancient woodland, the felling of mature trees, the loss of areas of high biodiversity, and also threats to “wildlife corridors” such as a proposed 3,500 house development next to the rewilded Knepp estate in West Sussex.
Surely programmes about the countryside need to talk about these threats? After all, what is the point of raising a generation of nature lovers if there’ll soon be little for them to appreciate?
How will Springwatch deal with the threat to Minsmere, for years the main location for the series? Minsmere, in Suffolk, is one of the RSPB’s top reserves, an area bursting with wildlife. Now the energy company EDF plans to build Sizewell C next door, a new nuclear power station that has local wildlife groups up in arms. Ben McFarland, head of conservation at Suffolk Wildlife Trust, said: “It is not the right solution to sacrifice nature at this scale and particularly at this time of climate and ecological emergency.” Could Springwatch ever mention this? Or would it handle it as Countryfile – the other massively successful nature series on British TV – did with its item on the Colne Valley, west of London? This focused on wildlife, historical changes, and protecting the ecosystem from an “invader” – the pennywort plant. It neglected to mention a much more serious invader, HS2. Talk about a white elephant in the room.
I sympathise with the programme makers’ dilemmas. The more nature is destroyed, the more Springwatch and Countryfile are needed like succour to our wounded souls. It’s also difficult for Springwatch to appear political. The Daily Mail already seems to have its presenter, Chris Packham, in its sights. If he says anything “controversial” he may be in danger of getting the full Meghan Markle treatment. And perhaps I’m lamenting not so much the failures of Springwatch and Countryfile as the neglect of these issues in other more suitable programmes. If TV news and current affairs recognised the assault on the British countryside and the biodiversity crisis as important news stories, then Springwatch and Countryfile could stick to what they do best.