[an error occurred while processing this directive]
« Previous | Main | Next »

Get involved online with Springwatch 2012!

Post categories:

Holly Spearing Holly Spearing | 15:12 UK time, Friday, 18 May 2012

Well it's that time of year again and Springwatch wouldn't be Springwatch without you, the audience. So here's how you can get involved...

On the blog: the team will be blogging regularly about our films, our big themes, our favourite photos and more. So if you have any opinions or stories of your own about these, please share them with us by commenting. Martin has already put in a request for your questions and stories for Unsprung.

The Springwatch webcams will be returning very soon, to bring you an amazing inside view into the daily struggles of our wildlife families for no less than 20 hours a day. We're also excited to be unveiling a new rolling commentary, which will feature your comments and tweets, as well as up-to-date information and insights about what's really happening on screen. Those of you who follow live BBC Sport and News events online will be familiar with it.

And in another exciting first for us, you'll be able to watch the Springwatch Webcams on Red Button from Sunday 27th May to Friday 1st June.

We went super social last year by stepping into Facebook and now over 37,000 of you have joined us there. You don't have to have a Facebook account to see what's going on, but if you do have one you can 'comment' and 'share' our stories with your friends or 'like' the Springwatch page and updates.

One change this year is that with everything else on offer, messageboards have been phased out - partly as our use of social media, like Twitter, Facebook and Flickr is growing so fast. And also as we will have plenty of specific blogs you can put comments on which will help make discussions more focussed and easy to find.

The Springwatch photo group on Flickr now holds over 180,000 of your stunning wildlife photos. Chris Packham is impressed. Need we say more. You can take a look at these glorious images by browsing the group, or if you want to get involved, upload and share your own - we can never have enough. All levels of photography are welcome and we'll be showing some of our favourites on the show as well as on Red Button. It's also a great place to get tips and advice from other photographers and to get help with identifying the animals in your snaps.

And last but certainly not least, you can follow us on Twitter for the latest news and retweets from our crews out in the field. Check out @BBC_Springwatch or hashtag your tweets with #springwatch and we'll be keeping an eye out for them.

We can't wait for you to join us.


Page 1 of 6

  • Comment number 1.

    All looking good to go but very sad to see that the message boards won't be happening.....Just one more nature forum axed......I think you may be surprised just how many people will find that a bit more than disappointing.

    The boards were an opportunity for like minded people to ask and have their questions answered and for newbies like me to gain confidence and yes friends...
    Oh well...best of luck to all the team for the new series.

  • Comment number 2.

    I have just found a smooth ivory colourd egg, about Bantam to Chicken size, BURIED in my flower bed. I saw that the earth had been disturbed, so suspecting a cat I inspected and found the egg is it a bird or a snake?
    Just before that but unconnected I saw a piebald crow bathing in my neighbour's water feature.
    Helpful comment appreciated

  • Comment number 3.

    Yes I too am very disappointed that the message board is going - I too am a normal person who does not have time or inclination to to facebook or twitter, and I think you will find you have disappointed many fans of the excellent programme.

  • Comment number 4.

    Will there be a mobile friendly link for webcams? Or even an app??!!

  • Comment number 5.

    Looking forward to the show starting, but really disappointed about the message boards. I loved helping people to answer their questions, especially about gardening for wildlife, and I'm really going to miss them. Not too chuffed about that - Facebook and Twitter are not the same at all - but i'll watch the show. Hope you'll reconsider for autumnwatch.

  • Comment number 6.

    Hello WartyNewt

    Glad I'm not the only one who feels very let down. You are right in saying that Facebook and Twitter just don't cover what the message boards offered. They gave us an opportunity to become really involved and to share knowledge and information with others.

    What chance do you think the closing down will be reconsidered now or in the future? None whatsoever in my view...whether it's because of cutbacks we'll never know but I feel really let down that this has been removed without any of us being asked what we think.... Shame... I've been an avid Watcher since the start but not so sure anymore

  • Comment number 7.

    I can't believe there won't be a message board this year, I've met so many lovely and informative people over the years and it will be such a shame not to make contact again. I'll have so many questions unanswered ...............Part of the magic of Springwatch and Autumnwatch is the messageboards.
    I do have a Twitter account and I have to say it doesn't have the same appeal, I hardly ever use it, it will be sad not to be a part of your community this time round.

    Hello Littlejojo and Wartynewt

  • Comment number 8.

    Why no Message Board this year? The Message Board was part of the magic of Spring and Autumnwatch. We've lost Bill, Simon and Kate and now the Message Board.

    And what are we left with? Two first class pancake makers and an overaged Children's TV presenter.

    I remember the old days when Spring and Autumnwatch were good programmes.

    The current presents, producers and directors couldn't run a fifty metre dash, never mind an interactive Nature sereis.

  • Comment number 9.

    Nice to see you FYH and Arch :-)
    Seems like this will be the only way we get to communicate this Spring (note to Ms Spearing - we're not all Twits and Facebookers you know)

    Would be nice to get some feedback on the decision to cut the boards....but I'm not going to hold my breath !

  • Comment number 10.

    Hi everyone,

    Thank you for your comments.

    We’re sorry to disappoint our messageboard fans. As you will no doubt know the messageboards became more and more difficult for Jez and I to manage but we held onto them for as long as possible. We're confident that our other offers will provide a range of opportunities for everyone to participate in the Springwatch community with more of a focus on what we have in common – our love of wildlife.

    There are also some excellent forums elsewhere online where we know Springwatch fans gather in their hundreds to talk nature, and much of the Springwatch community have always migrated to these at the end of the show! For example Friends of Nature (https://www.friends-of-nature.net/%29 and Nature UK (https://s9.zetaboards.com/Nature_uk/index/%29 are both very welcoming and well-managed online communities and you are bound to see some familiar faces in there. And with the phasing out of the messageboard we will be able to focus more on your comments in these blog posts where we hope to see familiar faces (or usernames!) popping up again.

    And as always we ask that you give us a chance (Welcome back Arch!)
    Sam :)

  • Comment number 11.

    unbelieveable that yet another messageboard - the final science and nature board - has gone.

    Been using S+N since going online back in the 90s and now what?

    I'm afraid the social networking sites just are not the same, and likewise a blog here or there is insufficient to cover all the different needs of the messageboard users

  • Comment number 12.

    I was sad to see Kate Humble go, although I understand her reasons. I'm not surprised, though, by the demise of the messageboard. The clue is at the end of Sam's first paragraph (hi Sam!), where she says the new arrangements will provide "...more of a focus on what we have in common-our love of wildlife".

    The messageboards used to have a bias towards serious discussion about nature, with one or two more frivolous threads (I have really enjoyed contributing to both types). In the last couple of years, however, along with the increase in trolling there has been a tendency for the board to be used as a social site and the serious threads have been hijacked by people wanting a laugh or winding others up for the sake of it. There were still some contributors who tried to provide information and advice but they were in the minority. To be honest this has been on the cards since the beginning of 2010 and it's why I stopped posting in autumn of that year. I'm sure the programmes will be as fun and informative as ever though!

  • Comment number 13.

    Thanks Sam, for at least getting back to us regarding the decision to cut the message boards..I do understand that they must have been difficult for you to manage (some of us rather more difficult than others!)

    I do know about the other forums that are available but think you underestimate how much we enjoyed meeting up with old friends and finding out about the happenings in all our various parts of the country.

    I take Birchdryad's point about the frivolity and the trolling...but was it really that bad ? and the boards were only up and running for a very short period of time each series.

    Oh well decision obviously taken and on such a beautiful Spring day we can only look forward to three weeks of SW !

    Thanks again for acknowledging our feelings.

  • Comment number 14.

    Thanks for the explanation Sam... I'll be sad not to see the usual bunch of people, hello to all of you who've posted on here, Arch, FYH, Little Jo et al.... :-) I learned so much from the MBs over the years and was looking forward to sharing some more good times... The social networking sites aren't for me, I'm afraid, I tried Twitter but never again..... not with the proverbial bargepole.... I'll keep an eye on the blogs though :-)

  • Comment number 15.

    I can understand the messageboards being seen as a problem to moderate, especially if Sam and Jez were the only ones involved. My sympathies and support. However, I also feel that Springwatch/Autumnwatch will lose what I saw as its main strength. That is as a bridge between the natural history enthusiast and the wider public who doesn't have much knowledge about natural history.

    Essentially the messageboard was a means of achieving what the programme itself could never achieve. Natural history, biodiversity etc, is the most complex subject there is. It is therefore impossible for any programme itself to explain everything to the audience, many of who might not know anything at all about natural history. Only a tiny fraction of the questions the public asked ever got onto Springwatch/Autumnwatch itself. The vast majority of the questions the public asked were answered by unpaid volunteers on the messageboard. Those with the expertise to answers questions like this.

    This I feel is not being recognised here. It wasn't merely the BBC offering messageboards for viewers. Those with the necessary expertise answered far more questions from the public than SW/AW ever could. I reckon that well in excess of 95% of questions asked by the public never get mentioned on SW/AW at all. The vast majority got answered by unpaid volunteers who got little recognition for their efforts, on the messageboards.

    This is what separated SW/AW from other natural history "entertainment" programmes. It was not just about drawing in viewers, but there was a real attempt to connect with the public. Part of that feeling was because people could ask questions and get them answered.

    It really is impossible to know how or who is going to answer those questions now. Unfortunately it now appears that when the public are enthused about natural history by SW/AW, and they want to ask a question about something they have found or seen - that at the end of the show most of them will be none the wiser and their questions will never have been answered. I doubt that a lot will receive the answer to their questions on Facebook or Twitter.

    However, I always try to keep my criticism positive i.e. not to just moan, but to criticise in a way which allows a positive way to respond to rememedy the problem. I would suggest some sort of easily accessible format where viewers can ask questions relating to natural history or topics on SW/AW and if they can't be dealt with on the programme, then at least let others answer them.

  • Comment number 16.

    PS. Thanks for the links Sam. However, the friends-of-nature link wasn't working, although I was able to find it via Google. Plus there is Wild About Britain.

  • Comment number 17.

    Hi Sam, You know me, I must have my annual Spring time rant.:-)

    Hello too to all here. I don't think the case for retaining the message boards could be put better than The Steb's comments.

    Birchdyad, I think you're totally out of order blaming the contributors for the demise of ther message boards. The BBC issued a statement a long time ago listing all the cuts that were to be made and the message boards were among them.

    Winnie's totally correct, they've been slowy removing one message board after another over the years and Twitter and Facebook must've been a Godsend to them.

    As The Steb remarks, where can anyone get help or answers on those sites? And the BBC Nature blogs are worse than useless.

  • Comment number 18.

    Hello everyone, nice to see some familiar usernames. TheSteB's comment sums up the main reason I will miss the message boards. The cuts are one possible (probable) reason for the demise of the message boards, but it did get pretty rough sometimes, and although some of us didn't mind the banter, others perhaps did and it must have been tough for two people to moderate.

    I also think that, while it probably caused some of the problems, the anonimity of the boards allowed people to open up more about their personal experiences than they would on social networking sites. Ok, so the trolls had a field day with it, but I know I wouldn't feel comfortable giving out as much information to internet strangers on Facebook. But then I suppose it's worth seeing how the comments on the blogs work out. So far, not so bad!

  • Comment number 19.

    SteB, hello, it's been a long time! You (and wartynewt, pathod, cattyface et al)) are exactly the contributors I was referring to when I said that some did try to continue to answer viewers questions. I always enjoyed and learned from those posts! You are right that it is sad that viewers with less knowledge of natural history are now going to lose out: it was always the messageboard's main strength and I learned a lot over the years!

    Arch, I wasn't blaming all the contributors, only a minority who were trolls and WUMS. Do you really want me to name them here? You are right about the cuts but if you read what Sam said, there was more to it than that. I see you haven't changed though and I don't think this is the place to start an argument so I'll leave it there. I hope everyone still enjoys the show as I intend to do!

  • Comment number 20.

    Birchdryad, I see you haven't changed in the least, still niggling away as usual then disappearing. Do you realise they've just cut the Archers' message boards down from eight or nine to one?

    Sam and Jermey have so say in whether or not the Nature message boards remain. When you remove the fun element from message boards, as you seem to wish to do, they may as well close them down anyway.

    You should try the Tellietubbies Board, I'm sure you'll find a suitable haven there away from all the nasty people. hee hee..

  • Comment number 21.

    That should read " Sam and Jeremey have no say.."

    Hi Warty, yes, I remember well the tussles you used to have with Billy Brock.:-)

  • Comment number 22.

    Arch, sadly the tone of your response only serves to confirm that the BBC have made the right decision in closing the boards. This sort of exchange makes uncomfortable reading for other people. Have a nice day!

  • Comment number 23.

    Birchy, my last word on the subject. I was merely pointing out the fact that you were wrong in blaming contributors for the closure of any BBC message board. As I've already said, they've been whittling away at the message boards for years and they'll probably keep doing so until they're all gone.

    I always assumed that the BBC, being funded by us, should provide forums and not direct us to commercial enterprises to comment on BBC programmes.

  • Comment number 24.

    Golly Gosh....seems almost like the good ol' message board days :-)

    Birchdryad....was it really so wrong to allow a little light hearted "frivolity" along with the helpful advice and information that the boards provided. What a very sad world it would be if we all adopted your approach.....

    Live and let live I think....and IMHO we have lost yet another valuable asset that will be sadly missed....not everyone can get out and about to enjoy this wonderful country of ours...and there are a lot of very lonely folk out there who found the boards interesting and yes...heaven forbid.....FUN !!

  • Comment number 25.

    Jojo, Hi! No, of course there's nothing wrong with a few frivolous threads :-) You know as well as I do that I've made my fair share of contributions to those in the past! (Cor Wow, LCFC and we were both on the very memorable "Woodcock's 4000th post", weren't we, and what a laugh that was!) The problem was that it stopped being contained to a few threads and started to affect the whole board (well, I think so, anyway!) That isn't anyone's fault really, just an unfortunate consequence.

  • Comment number 26.

    I should have added that I don't the contributors to those threads are responsible for the closure either! I'm not explaining myself very well. What I'm trying to say is that from the BBC's point of view the boards are about nature and SW/AW in particular and they did seem to be degenerating into a playground fight on occasion. I am interested in how they might make blog topics work as an alternative, eg if they start a discussion via a blog topic and we all take it from there, it might work quite well? It will possibly keep the discussions more focussed.

  • Comment number 27.

    Sorry that should have read "I don't think the contributors to those threads are responsible for closure....."!

  • Comment number 28.

    Of course I remember those threads Birchy and a lot of fun and pretty harmless they were too !

    Now had you picked out some of the more unpleasant threads that appeared more recently ie personal attacks on some of the presenters, then I might have more sympathy with your point of view.

    Wish I shared your optimism that the blogs will provide an opportunity for disussion and sharing but I'm afraid I don't.

    But hey ho...nothing we, the viewers, say or do will change the decisions made by the powers that be...more's the pity.

  • Comment number 29.

    Birchy's talking nonsense. Of course you'll have disagreements on message boards where nature's being discussed, and of course they'll ocasionally get rather heated. That's how the adult world works. What's the point in having a forum where everyone has to agree with everyone else?

    Some people aren't mature enough to realise that others who might hold opposing views or different views, aren't trolls or windup mearchnats as she calls them.

    And how does she know what the BBC's point of view was regarding the Nature forums? Everyone else seems to be aware that the Nature boards have gone because it seems to be too much effort and expense to keep them open.

    Welcome to the real world 2012, Birchy.

  • Comment number 30.

    Bedsides, my typing is still crap so I don't care all that much.:-)

  • Comment number 31.

    I do sympathise with how you feel, Jojo, really! At their best, the boards were a place for like minded people to meet up regularly and exchange views about nature while having a bit of fun along the way :-) At their worst though, they were a place where decent, long-standing contributors (and I don't mean me!) were driven off entirely and lots of interested viewers who didn't have much knowledge posted questions that didn't get answered because there were only a handful of people trying to answer them (To be fair, lots of them asked questions and either didn't come back for answers or didn't acknowledge the responses!) Maybe if the discussions are BBC-led, more people will get answers? I don't know! I did "meet" some lovely people on the boards and I will always be glad about that! :-)

  • Comment number 32.

    If you want to film House Martins we have a nest above our flat and there are 3 across the road from us. It would be nice to see film of these wonderful little birds.
    The other evening the sky was full of House Martins weaving about catching bugs, it was a real specticle and a sight that I enjoy time and time again. Top marks to a top bird.

  • Comment number 33.

    I have just heard a cuckoo!The sound is to me the epitamy of Spring and brings back such wonderful childhood memories to me. Music to my ears, it's made my day!

  • Comment number 34.

    Seeing as there're no message boards this year can I put a link on here?........Thanks
    The Bumblebee Consevation Trust have a new website, well worth a look :)


  • Comment number 35.

    Arghh I mean Conservation.....................where's the edit button???? ;)

  • Comment number 36.

    will miss reading message board but at least we can put views on the blogs springwatch is the only place i have ever put things on message boards or blogs i get lost when tried twitter once. my son follows kate, chris, simon, martin, lyndsey and proberly many more but these blogs are my limit and great fun will maybe look at the friends of nature site mentioned by sam in his repley many thanks for a great site and program of course

  • Comment number 37.

    This is a BBC budget cut laced with salad cream to make it appear more palatable.

  • Comment number 38.

    10.At 11:49 22nd May 2012, Sam Unsprung Researcher wrote:
    "We’re sorry to disappoint our messageboard fans. As you will no doubt know the messageboards became more and more difficult for Jez and I to manage but we held onto them for as long as possible. We're confident that our other offers will provide a range of opportunities for everyone to participate in the Springwatch community with more of a focus on what we have in common – our love of wildlife."

    This reply is unsatisfactory. The in house messageboard was an important part of "Springwatch", where viewers could discuss the programmes and wildlife in general.
    The decision to close it and farm out discussion to a commercial site is shameful. Not everyone is interested in getting involved with twitface.

  • Comment number 39.

    The writing was on the wall for a while for the message board but it's a shame that a place that had so much knowledge and fun will be lost. The BBC couldn't be bothered with them, that's the truth of it but it's a very short sighted policy I think.

  • Comment number 40.

    Thanks for all the good work Sam. I will miss the message boards a lot, have learned a lot from it all over the years.
    As has been pointed out the programme has lost an essential ingredient for the viewers, and it is being reduced to the "normal" level of BBC excelence.
    Hope to chat to you all on FoN.

  • Comment number 41.

    Hi all

    I cannot believe the message boards have gone! Although not a lot of time lately with work commitments anyways, but it was always welcoming to come home to an hour or so on the boards.

    Hi to all the regulars, Winnie Feedy, Arch etc.

    I do think that now the boards have gone a lot of the website will now become a bit of a ghost town, hopefully I'll be wrong.


  • Comment number 42.

    Firstly, sorry for repeating myself in my long comment. I did a few quick edits to make it clear that this was positive criticism and not negative criticism. Unfortunately I appear to have accidentally left a paragraph I re-wrote.

    May I suggest to the SW team that they find a way and format for allowing questions not answered on SW to be answered by other informed viewers. Whilst it may be possible to do this on the blog I think in practise this might be difficult. A blog entry for questions when the programme is on is likely to result in a very long list of comments. Comments, especially of the question type coming in far faster after SW programmes. You can already get an impression of this from the SW Flickr group ID threads. However, a general thread for questions on the SW website is likely to result in far more questions than on the SW Flickr group. This will make it practically difficult to follow all the questions and the answers.

    On the messageboard each of these questions would be in a separate thread. So it was reasonably easy for a viewer and the person asking the question to keep track of the answers to their questions, and any additional questions in response to the answers or further answers. I'm only thinking out aloud and suggesting ideas for the SW team. Therefore it may be a good idea if a format could be found that makes it easier to keep track of questions and the answers to those specific questions. A slew of questions on the blog, which is likely to happen once the programme starts is likely to result in the answers being separated from the questions by a lot of space - if they are essentially on the same thread - and not easy for the viewer to see the answers to their particular questions without wading through all the comments on the blog.

    What I'm trying to say is that given my experience of the sheer volume of questions that occur around SW programmes it is difficult to see how this will work if they are all on one very long and unwieldy thread. I think it could work in a blog format, but it would need to be different to how it happens now.

  • Comment number 43.

    I am devastated! The messageboard was something which I looked forward to twice a year. How do I ask a question or paste a photo now that it is gone. It was very well laid out and one could choose which item related to themselves and if they could help or not. The friends and experts on there were brilliant, not just the TV stars. We were a close 'family' club for nature loving people. Surely its not too late to bring it back or something even better, so that queries can be categorised and everyone could get the right answers from the right people. I have a query on a bird I have seen in my garden. What is it? What part of twitter and facebook do I go to. This site should be special to the BBC only and an even better messageboard should be introduced. It is a big mistake, so you must think again.

  • Comment number 44.

    Nice thought Helen...but unfortunately decisions like this taken by the BBC are usually irrevocable....I think we have to accept that the boards, as we knew them, are gone but I am pleased to see the comment from theSteB....there is no way the blogs will be able to deal with the volume of questions and comments that occur once the series goes live and Facebook and Twitter are just not designed for any sort of meaningful discussion.....Hope the Springwatch team will give some thought to a possible solution.

    I totally agree with you that this is a very shortsighted decision to have been reached and without any sort of feedback from us, the viewers :-(

    However, think we have to accept the the message boards are gone for good and just hope it doesn't mean the Watches may go the same way in the future

  • Comment number 45.

    hi readers, just an update for you, if you read my blog on tuesday you will know that my mum had a nest of five baby robbins, they are still doing well but delighted to tell you that we watched them fledge today!, we are still able to check on them and see them on camera but i doubt that will be for long. I feel so privilaged to have been able to watch them, they are very definately my fave bird.

  • Comment number 46.

    Steb I'm not sure about the "informed" viewers idea, I think we just need the message boards back for discussion purposes, otherwise it's just an exclusive club for the knowledgeable types. It's like the whole photo/flckr thing where the programme is only showing/praising the "brilliant" photos but we don't all have a Cannon EOS 550D.......sorry if I just made that up I've only got a little fuji. I do appreciate the amazing photos but would like to see others too without too much criticism...........ok Chris ;)
    We want a message board for proper discussion where a whole community of nature lovers can get together to share in their experiences, ask questions, try their hand at ID's show some photos.
    Ok got that off my chest...............Hello Tingles, Poolie and Helen

  • Comment number 47.

    I for one will not be sorry to see the message boards go. I had more or less given up posting on them and limited the number of threads I even bothered to read long before the end of the last Autumn Watch series. I do, however, still (throughout the year, not just when one of the Watch programmes are on) read and occasionally contribute to, the blogs here and on the BBC Wales site, the Springwatch and BBC Nature pages on Facebook, and, under the screen name "former-extog", the Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter Watch groups on Flickr.

    I have a lot of respect for the SteB and both the argument he makes here and the information he provided on the message boards and continues to give on Flickr but I think there is a flaw in his main argument for retaining the message boards. I do not believe that the motive for posting nearly all of the questions on the boards or the blogs, Facebook, and Twitter (I largely exclude Flickr because the majority of the questions there are legitimate ID requests) is to get a genuine answer from other contributors. If they were desperate to know the answer then anybody computer savvy enough to find, register and post on one of these sites ought to be able to find it for themselves on the internet or at least do enough research to be able to restrict their question to genuine points of difficulty.

    I think the reason most people post questions is to get them asked on the telly and to bask in the glory of the name check. This accounts for the fact that a very large number of the questioners seem never to revisit their question to read the answers given or thank those who have responded. There will still be plenty of these questions and the producers will continue to broadcast those which most fit the level at which the shows are aimed, whether or not they have been answered by others.

    I also disagree with those who think the boards should be maintained for the so called "fun" threads. I can see no reason why the BBC should pay, at any time let alone in a period of cuts, for what are essentially either private messaging facilities for the, at most, couple of dozen people who want to "meet friends", a place to drool over the male presenters or ingratiate themselves with the presenters or production staff, somewhere to play inane word games (mea culpa on this one) or contribute to the very occasional relevant posts on these threads and are prepared to trawl through the drivel to do so.

    The more serious posts on the message board e.g., reporting sightings, passing on personal knowledge or experiences or showing off photos (mea culpa again) will be just as adequately dealt with on the blogs, Facebook, Twitter, or Flickr. Incidentally I don't agree with feedyourhedgehog's points about the photographs used either. Appreciation of photography is very subjective and I personally don't think many of photos shown on the programmes or the red button or selected as "photo of the day" are particularly "brilliant". More expensive cameras and particularly lenses are more flexible and some of the photos could not be taken without this equipment but many of the photographs, including most of those selected for their cuteness, could be taken by a decent photographer with a compact camera. Any photographer should welcome constructive criticism from anyone especially someone with Chris's knowledge and experience as an opportunity to improve. Even if you don't agree understanding the basis of the disagreement is a learning experience.

    The only possibly valuable aspect of the message boards which will be lost will be the "discussion" topics which are not the subject of a specific blog by the production team. Many of these were hobby horse subjects.The inevitable "hunting", "predators" (Magpies, Sparrowhawks et al), "cats", "dogs" "bring back/get rid of Bill, Simon Kate etc, etc." recurred every year. These always became arguments between those with entrenched views and/or vested interests, frequently became personal and bitter, upset those of a more sensitive disposition, gave rise to usually unfounded accusations of trolling by those with opposing views, went round in circles, became sterile and were impossible to moderate.

    These threads and the "fun" ones were I suspect the main and in my opinion justified reasons for getting rid of the message boards or at least not being able to defend them against budget cuts. The blame lies with the regulars on the message boards who turned it into the mess it became.

  • Comment number 48.

    I'll miss the message boards, but am not surprised at their closure, I'm sure there's a saving made though the whole question of the manpower to run and moderate them is a bit of a red herring I think. I'm sure there would be plenty of volunteers to help moderate the board and it doesn't take a great deal to verify someone's qualifications for the role (to avoid those who might try and use it as a personal crusade). I'd certainly put my hand up.

    Whilst I see various people's points about trolls and WUMs, I don't think you can avoid those wherever you go and I've always been of the opinion that it doesn't really matter if some dippy person tries to wind people up with hysterical nonsense. Far more people will read the messages than contribute, so you're writing to them as much as those that answer and a clearly written and reasonable argument will be noticed. Indeed, ingrained points of view and repetitive slanging matches will actually degrade everybody's opinion of a WUM's argument, so more fool them!

    pen-y-bont_mike makes a good point about the photographs shown - sure, good kit can make the job of photographing wildlife easier, but I have seen far too many excellent pictures from compacts and bridge cameras to get snobbish about DSLRs. As for Chris P's criticisms of pictures, I went to see his show last year at the local theatre and I can assure you he rips apart his own pictures even more! If you listen to his comments, they're not about technical aspects relating to the camera, they're invariably about composition and that's something that affects any photo from a pinhole camera to those costing many thousand of ££

    Will I poke my nose into FB? Hmm, not sure - I don't use FB at all - their privacy record and certainly their T&Cs relating to pictures discourage me, but maybe I'll generate a sock-puppet account to see what's happening and whether it can properly replace the board.

  • Comment number 49.

    What a load of typical sanctimonious nonsense from pen-y-bon-Mike and one or two others. Spring and Autumnwatch are fun programmes, meant to inform and present Nature in a light hearted way, and the message boards reflected that.

    Ther are plenty of privately operated forums on the internet where deep, in-depth and serious discussions about Nature can be joined.

    The Spring and Autmnwatch message boards were never aimed at those who already know everything, or suffered a humour by pass as children.

  • Comment number 50.

    Very disappointed and sad there's no message board. I don't 'tweet' or belong to facebook- too much rubbish. There should really be a dedicated wildlife forum here for the duration of the programme.

    Please can we have more Butterflies included!

  • Comment number 51.

    Hi all. Well it looks like hello and goodbye to all the regulars on the messageboard. Come on BBC, please have a rethink and give us our "board" back. Life will not be the same any more :o(

  • Comment number 52.

    Nil Desperandum, Havadram.;-)

  • Comment number 53.

    Hi Arch, certainly looks like "The Carnival is Plover" :o)

  • Comment number 54.

    Hi Havadram sad to think it's Bye :-(

    Totally agree with Arch about the purpose of the Watch programmes and the message boards provided a place for serious discussion and a bit of light hearted stuff...Wasn't that why there were two separate dedicated boards....?

    Lighten up Mike.....live and let live...sorry if our frivolity offended you in any way......but seems the closure will have pleased at least some of you !

  • Comment number 55.

    Hi Jojo, yes it's very sad and seems like the end of an era. For those who didn't like the fun posts and word games etc. I found them exactly that, fun, and very educational at the same time. Ah well, let's hope it's not only politicians who do U-turns. :o)

  • Comment number 56.

    Mike and Jo, I kept my comments very lighthearted as I have no wish to be confrontational, the point I was trying to make was about the show and the messageboards being accessible to everyone. I'm not snobbish about good DSLRs and hope to own one myself one day. I don't have much knowledge about all things camera and would like to learn more. The message boards can be a great place for people like me to discuss and explore this. I have to say though that if one day I did get a photo on the programme and Chris made one of his comments I'd be so embarrassed................but secretly chuffed too, that's why I added a wink to my previous post
    I'm sorry that you both feel strongly against the messageboard as you both obviously have a good knowledge and information you can share.
    Hello Havadram

  • Comment number 57.

    Hi feedy, hope you are well. Keep plodding away with your little Fuji, I do pretty much the same and remember the camera is only as good as the person behind it. I did find that it's worth getting a good photo editing package, it's amazing what you can do with one. Happy snapping :o)

  • Comment number 58.

    Oh Feedy you got me so wrong !! I'm very sad to see the demise of the boards...I was one of Mike's lightweight, silly posters but I'm also very interested in wildlife and the natural world...I actually do get out there and see for myself too Mike and found the boards a helpful and useful place to learn more as well as somewhere, just twice a year and for a very short period of time, to meet people you had come to look on as "friends" and to share a mutual interest.

    I think the Springwatch team should take note that the vast majority of postings in reply to this blog have been about the closure of the boards rather than about the up and coming series, which I have to say sounds as fascinating as ever.

    Please don't think I'm one of the strange folk who think the closure is a good thing....I'm as upset about it as anyone :-(

  • Comment number 59.

    Oh bless you Jo not you.......... my mistake *doh* I meant Whistling Joe but forgot the e I'm so sorry.
    I'm completely on your side I want the message boards for all nature lovers old and new and "silly" posters like us make the board welcoming and accessible for newcomers and first time posters and I'm terribly sad at it demise.

    Apologies again x

  • Comment number 60.

    Obviously, message-boards victims of necessary budget cuts. Thanks very much, Messrs. Murdoch, Cameron et.al. we love you too.

  • Comment number 61.

    I would think the Jubilee and the Olympics must be using up a lot of the BBC's resources this year, so hopefully we may see the messageboard return in the future....well, we can always hope. :o)

  • Comment number 62.

    Oh Feedy honey...couldn't think you could have meant me....no worries...gosh I can be a sensitive little soul sometimes !!...seems to me that Mike and Joe and Birchdryad somewhat outnumbered on here...............

    Love your optimism Havadram but can't share it I'm afraid :-( Once something disappears folks forget it was ever there and just how good it was......end of an era...indeed !

  • Comment number 63.

    Gutted that the MB won't here this year. I didn't post often but spent many an hour following discussions which were fun and informative. It was even more interesting when the disagreements kicked in - usually by day 2. Springwatch won't be the same I'm afraid.

  • Comment number 64.

    Oi! I didn't say I was happy the boards shut - quite the opposite! I'm not surprised - it's an easy cut to make - but not happy at all. I even volunteered to help moderate if the Beeb are struggling to find manpower.....

  • Comment number 65.

    Incidentally, I notice the board's actaully been left up "for reference", so any cost saving must be pretty minimal from a hosting perspective (ie the data is still all there in read-only form). So it must be a manpower issue. So come on Beeb, seek some volunteers to help moderate the board and keep it open!

    One other thing that seems very strange. In order to communicate with the programme, I will have to sign up with a 3rd party organisation (ie FB) and agree to their T&Cs. Am I the only one that finds that a very strange thing for a public service broadcaster to insist upon? Doesn't feel very "inclusive".

  • Comment number 66.

    Hi everyone - sad to see the boards aren't up and running. So many contacts will be lost, and yes though there are loads of private forums and messageboards out there the chances of meeting ALL the same folk on them are pretty remote.

    Like many of you I'm not sure that commenting on the blogs will have the same effect as the MBs, I'm not sure it's possible to have an 'atmosphere' online but I think generally the boards served a purpose that won't be replicated on the blogs and a lot more will be missed by the mods (no critisism intended to Sam JT Tae LHJ ect). Most of the regulars had pretty think skins when it comes to Trolls/WUMs and generally knew how to handle it - the serious posters were recognised, games were played and a roundup social thread, many of those were the targets of attempted hijacks but strengh in numbers of the posters kept them on topic. As was as always said 'if you dont like it then don't read it' advice which a lot seemed to be incapable of following. Not everyone is on Twitter/FB and many don't want to be - I think the BBC are missing a trick here and alienating many of their loyal posters.

    Still I guess we have to give the new format a try - much like when the board was split into two then three forums. I'm skeptical but will reserve judgement until it's been tried.

  • Comment number 67.

    I was really looking forward to the opening of the messageboards, again. To me, it was one of the main highlights of SW and AW. While I appreciate the merits of the blogs, etc. there was nothing quite like the little community on the boards. It was great to be able to meet like-minded people, and have in-depth conversations about the wildlife we all love so much.

    I feel that science and factual programmes in general has been sidelined by the BBC recently - The Royal Intitution Christmas Lectures, for example, were demoted to a lesser channel and had less episodes last year - and I fear that this is just another symptom of that.

    I sincerely hope the MBs can be saved, if not for this 'Watch' then, at least, for the next. I'm sure there would be no end of volunteers to aid with moderation of the boards, which I'm sure would help keep them running.

    I also think that perhaps if the boards were to return, people would appreciate them more, for fear of having lost them, and perhaps this would reduce cases of 'trolling' and such.

    If they really can't be rescued, then they will be truly missed;
    a very sad goodbye to everyone. :'(

  • Comment number 68.

    I can't say I'm surprised that the messageboards are not going to open this year. For the last two years I have almost given up on them due to a small minority ruining them and the lack of proper moderation (Not your fault Sam and Jeremy! just not enough eyes to watch it) There were too many threads posted on the same topics and no attempt was ever made to put a stop to this which made them unusable at busy times. I actually suggested after autumnwatch that they shouldn't be reopened. Its very Sad to see as they used to be a fantastic place to share experiences and ask questions. I much rather see them closed completely though than to continue as they were last year. Good decision BBC.

    However we still have these blogs to post on for those that don't like facebook or Twitter and at least here the topics will be set by the team so we won't have to wade through miles of duplicate threads and other rubbish to find what we want. Last year I found that these blogs and the springwatch twitter were the best way to interact with the programme.

    Really looking forward to the series this year, can't wait for tomorrow night!!!

  • Comment number 69.

    Very sad that the Beeb have decided to axe the 'Watch' messageboards. They closed down the gardening one in April which confused and upset the very loyal community there too. I've a feeling that these changes are a blanket decision by the corporation to cut costs and nothing to do with controversial or inflammatory postings on any of the boards. Discussions on the gardening board were ultra-mild, ultra-polite and ultra-educational for heavens sake - the salt of the earth you might say - but this little gem was still cut down. The 'Watch' boards had more fun about them than the gardening board, reflecting the more light-hearted atmosphere of the Spring and Autumn watch progs and were none the worse for this i think. I read the different threads that caught my eye, laughed and learned from the jokes and knowledge that others shared, raised my eyebrows at the sharper posts and occasionally felt brave enough to have a go at the quizzes - and even got the odd one right! Oh spring and autumn watch just won't be teh same again. :0(

    Can't we get a petition going?

  • Comment number 70.

    Well, that's not a surprisng statement coming from you, Goldfinch. You've got your own little forum tucked away, available only to a certain few, which I notice you've taken great care not to mention in your post. What about all the others who don't wish to partake in mindless tedium? If the Blogs are as good as you claim, then close down FON and join them.

    As Hi-Coo says, no one was forced to read any thread on the SW and AW boards. No one came to your house and grabbed you by the scruff of the neck and forced anybody to read the the threads. The people who say they're glad the message boards are gone are only natural chronic moaners anyway who'd find something else to moan and complain about who'd be better off on a forum of their own.

    I might just set up a forum similar to the SW/AW boards for all the others who want them to stay open.

  • Comment number 71.

    Hello littlepawprint

    Petitions have been tried before to try to keep the boards open throughout the year and though lots of us feel as strongly as you do....they've never succeeded or even been acknowledged, so I'm afraid I don't hold out much hope. :-( but I'm more than happy to sign up !

    And to Goldfinch...well no I'm not at all surprised to see you endorsing the decision to close the boards....I think we all know that you have your own forum....hope you do allow a little lightheartedness from time to time....a little bit of fun never hurt anyone you know !

  • Comment number 72.

    I am seeing the strangest fish when wading the river severn. They are 3ft long, 6in diameter they hang in the fast stream holding the river bed. They are not eels, possibly lampreys but I thought this species was smaller. Wading in the river I could reach out and touch them. They seem oblivious to my presence. What are they?

  • Comment number 73.

    The blog seems more complicated this year compared to the Messageboard of previous years. Is it just me?

  • Comment number 74.

    Hello everyone,what lovely weather?!Mind you my horses & dog don't seem to be enjoying it,only my cat seems to be enjoying it!I was so looking forward to the message boards again this year,was a shock just now when i found out they have been cancelled.I have checked the web cams out already,they are great,at least they haven't been cancelled.
    I was talking to 1 of the girls over the horses yesterday morning and she was telling me that it was on the news this week that farmers and game keepers want to have the law changed to allow them to kill buzzards as they are killing the pheasants that are being released for shooting!!How utterly wrong this is,i do hope and prey the law doesn't get changed.The buzzards where i keep my horse prey on the untold amount of rabbits that are there,in my opinion rabbits easy to catch than pheasants.Once again the human race thinks it should just kill what it thinks is getting in it's way!The game keepers are only going to kill the pheasants anyway so just leave the buzzards alone,i would say more pheasants are killed on the road by cars than any buzzard!

  • Comment number 75.

    last bit should of said than by any buzzard

  • Comment number 76.

    It's relatively easy to set up a board - plenty of free ones if you can put up with the constant stream of ads. Pretty easy to administer/moderate. (and uber easy to ban folk as well!!!!) ;)

    Yes the boards were flooded this year with pages of 'Where is...' threads - at one point on the main page there were over 15 Where is Simon threads but once JT pinned a thread at the top they did begin to ease off except of the odd one or two who were incapable of reading it, a small price to pay really. It was just a pity that there is no way to report Trolls/WUMs in the House Rules as they didn't really breach any of those rules, if anything it was the same arguments being repeated over and over by those who, while opinions differed were unwilling to listen to another POV and decided they were right and everyone else was wrong. But personally I stopped reading those threads when they descended into personal attacks.

    As to FoN - they were asked to stop advertising on the BBC boards in 2011.

  • Comment number 77.

    Hello Hi_Coo

    Nice to see you again...and as always you come up with a measured response to this debate.

    I do understand how people became frustrated with the boards and repetitive threads being started over and over but, as you say, things did improve and I thought there were some interesting and stimulating discussions....what a very dull place it would be if we all agreed all the time.

    As you say the "sillier" threads were quite easy to avoid...have no idea why someone like Goldfinch went anywhere near them....!!

    I did have a very brief look at FON but have to say that I found it rather intimidating...lots of folk with way more knowledge than me,,, whereas the boards seemed to have such a wide mix of beginners and the very knowledgeable and experienced

    Would be great to think that the BBC would reconsider this decision but it's probably too late now....I don't see how these blogs can possibly fill the hole left by the absence of the boards.

  • Comment number 78.

    I can't believe anyone apart from smirking, smug schoolkids would come on here and say they're glad the message boards are closed.

    To me, it was the variety of people with differing opinions that made the SW/AW boards so interesting. I personally enjoyed taking part in and reading the various debates that took place. even if they did get heated at times. That's what life's all about.

    If you like humdrum message boards where everybody agrees with each other, then you're welcome to them.

  • Comment number 79.

    By the way, If FON were asked to stop promoting themselves on BBC message Boards, why are we being continually told by the presenters of Spring and Autumnwatch to follow them on the commercial sites like Twitter and Facebook?

    Certain people on the BBC seem to forget that they're there for us, the licence payers who fund them and keep them in well paid jobs.

  • Comment number 80.

    "I am seeing the strangest fish when wading the river severn. They are 3ft long, 6in diameter they hang in the fast stream holding the river bed. They are not eels, possibly lampreys but I thought this species was smaller. Wading in the river I could reach out and touch them. They seem oblivious to my presence. What are they?"

    These would be Sea Lampreys as they do grow up to 3 foots or so. There are 3 species of Lamprey, the Brook, the River and the Sea Lamprey - roughly in order of ascending size. There is an interesting pdf. with lots of information on the link below. It has a table of contents so you can go righ to the section on Sea Lampreys.

  • Comment number 81.

    So many people are expressing regret at the end of the message board it shows what a great community it was. I think it's really sad it's ended. Yet it was only for a few weeks twice a year and it surely couldn't have cost that much. "Get involved" the Beeb keep saying and yet they close down the most popular way we had to do just that. Pushing us off to commercial sites just isn't right. I don't think the programmes will be the same now.

  • Comment number 82.

    Thanks SteB have read the PDF file, yes that’s them. Did not know they existed; only been fishing 50 years. Just when I thought I knew it all. Aren’t they strange.

  • Comment number 83.

    Sad to see the messageboards go, they were a good laugh and I enjoyed reading posts by those more knowledgeable than me (and indeed those with different opinions), and I like to think I was also able to contribute by boring people to death with deer information and occassional farming yarns. I've been involved in moderating boards in the past however, and inevitably on subjects where people hold strong views it does get hard to keep order. I'll miss 'em and I'll take the opportunity to say it was a pleasure whilst it lasted!

    Back to the Roebucks I guess!

  • Comment number 84.

    FoN was never asked to stop promoting on the messageboards, the FoN admin decided ourselves not to do so except on the closing of the boards as a place for people to go when they did. A couple of the sw production team are members and one has kindly posted a link on this blog (albeit, incorrect, the correct one can be found on post #40) I understand its not for everyone but we have many members who are quite happy there.

    Starting a private forum is all very well but it doesn't help with contacting the sw team which is what the messageboards were for. Privately run forums are great though for keeping in touch with friends and seeking help and advice, they are easy to set up on one of the free sites but are incredibly hard to keep going for a long time.

    I am not happy that the messageboards have closed Arch, once again you only read the bits you want to read! I am merely glad they have closed them rather than keeping them going in the state they were in for the last two years. I think the BBC had two choices, either close them altogether or invest more money in staff to run them properly. Sadly, as with many things on the BBC they chose the cheaper option. Also at 34 I'm far from being a smirking, smug schoolkid!

    This blog was about getting involved in springwatch on the web and personally I find twitter and facebook the friendliest and easiest ways to do this - even with the messageboard open. Stevegriff and SteB have just demonsrated how this blog works just as well for helping others too - a question asked and an answer given by another friendly springwatcher!

  • Comment number 85.

    Fair enough, Andy, but what puzzles me is the fact that if you thought the Blogs were the best way to contact the Springwatch team, you found it neccessary to come on here and congratulate the BBC for closing the message boards down? Espcially when you see how many people are unhappy with the decision?

    And be honest, how many Springwatch viewers get replies to their Nature questions on the Blogs? Very few, and even less on Twitter. The message boards were an access for most people, if not directly to the Springwatch Team, then to others who could answer their questions.

    I think the BBC have made a grave error of judgement by cutting off the viewing public from the programme.

  • Comment number 86.

    Moo jojo, nice to see you again. Hope you had a good few months since we last spoke on AW.

    One 'problem' I do see with posting on here/FB/Twitter is being unable to start your own thread - though I've already seen a couple of Where is Kate already :? some folk just don't learn. Personally was never prone to starting my own but it there were loads of people who did, yes a question can be raised via other mediums but also potentially lost in amongst all the hundreds of others. OK we had a glut of the same threads being started when the team broached a controversial subject but the well thought out ones 'survived' dropping off the front page becase those of us who were used to the boards looked for them specifically. And I think youre right jojo - it would have been boring if we all stuck with the same three or four subjects and agreed with each other. "I may not like what you say, but I will defend your right to say it" though unlike Voltaire not to the death for just a messageboard.

    The lack of info about the boards not being opened may cause a few folk to think they can't ask questions of the team - yes I know the presenters tell everyone to contact them on Twitter etc but they also announced many times about SK and KH leaving but that didn't stop hundreds asking Where Is! Not everyone has twitter or FB and unlike the boards they may not be interested in joining/registering for just a couple of weeks.
    I agree with you too Tingles - BBC say Get Involved but we're closing the main way most of you go in touch with us? Not the most logical move!
    Like you I think it's a lost cause jojo, no way to start a social thread on the blogs, one where we all liked to gather at the end and discuss the show and the presenters, animals, clips (and where was Simon/Kate/Gordon...), what we would like to see in the shows and to get to know each other as much as you can in cyberspace. Personally made a lot of cyberfriends who I now know as 'fleshy friends' as we call each other. I doubt there will be the same feeling of community on these pages - but as I said, will wait and see, and hopefully be proved wrong.

    PS @stevegriff post 82... NEVER say you know everything about a subject ;) that's just tempting fate you know LOL

  • Comment number 87.

    We recently visited the Oxlip woods at Great Grandsen and Gamblingay. I have had a long association with oxlips, writing in the horticultural and countryside press for their protection since 1964. Here is the link to our video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLQIbxjHihk

  • Comment number 88.

    Hi Littljojo

    I think you're right that it's a lost cause about trying to get the board up and running again as the decision has probably been made a long time ago and the majority of the board users are now just seeing the results. There's a statement on the Press Office site outlining the beeb's plans to cut their spend on online services by £34 million i think, because of the freezing of the licence fee. I can understand the necessity to manage services more efficiently as production must be horrendously expensive. However, it's a shame that they have apparently assumed that their entire audience - young and not so young - are facebook and twitter users. I've joined facebook but now keep getting emails saying someone wants to be my 'friend'. When i check, it's usually someone from the States i've never heard of! And what's all this 'like' business about? I'm under seige and all i want to do is to talk and learn about wildlife in a friendly forum. Blow facebook, i'm off to do a bit of weeding. Looking forward to Springwatch this eve though - watching the Box i can manage!

  • Comment number 89.

    Hello Littlepawprint

    Nice to hear from a fellow anti-facebooker....can't get my head round all that liking stuff ! do admit to being a bit of a twitterer but what use that for question and answer or discussion? As, I think it was Arch, pointed out how may responses to questions do you see from the Springwatch team on Twitter ? and how do you discuss things when you're limited to 140 characters...!!

    I'm yet to find a forum where I feel "at home".....perhaps it's just me but the ones I've seen and heard about all seem to be a bit of a clique where you're either a member of the club or a bit of an outsider to be viewed with caution if not complete disdain...hope that's not too harsh ......that's why I loved the boards because there were no T & C...well oly sensible guidelines, and it didn't matter if you were a bit of a lightweight, like me, or a seasoned pro....like Mike and Goldfinch and TheSteB...

    Oh well no point in crying over lost causes or dead message boards I suppose.....stil can't for the life of me fathom how the team think these blogs are going to work but I suppose we'd better wait and see

    Happy weeding :-)

  • Comment number 90.

    Something else I'm missing is the 'reply to this post' link...

    Went out for a wander yesterday and while there wasn't that much in the way of birdlife I saw a fair number of butterflies. My best sighting was a green-veined white, (I don't know how to tell if it was male or female) but it got disturbed by a bumblebee, I got an excellent view for about a minute of him/her feeding on a clump of dandelions. The angle I was at meant I could see the feeding tube probing right down into the petals to get the nectar (I presume). Normally they don't stay still long enough to get such a good view. It was the first time I got to see it for myself.

  • Comment number 91.

    I think some Martins are trying to build a nest or nests under my eaves, but although they're going backwards and forwards every few minutes and chattering a lot, nothing seems to be happening... any ideas? Are they just checking it out, or does it not look like anything is happening to begin with?

  • Comment number 92.

    have a magpie nest this year with some baby magpies , so nice to watch the adult bird feed the baby's .

  • Comment number 93.

    I have robins nesting on my balcony in a window box. I wondered why my pansies were not doing so well. I kept watering them. I soon found out that every time I tried to water a robin flew out and missed me or actually bumped into me in his/her haste to get away. At the moment there are two eggs in the nest. Do I carry on watering the plants?? In this heat everything is dying. I am afraid it's too hot and without the protection of the pansies etc., will they be OK? What do I do? Will I disturb them if I try and plant new flowers in the other window boxes I have on the balcony? How long will the nesting period be? Your help would be appreciated.

  • Comment number 94.

    To all those dear ladies I wooed,poetically,in 2011 (Dispensia,Helen,shieldmaidenof Rohan et al)I say I thoroughly enjoyed the chase,but alas I now have to bid you farewell.No thread left.No fun left.

  • Comment number 95.

    Hello all - I'm so excited that Springwatch is back! And yes I'm so looking forward to swooning for Mr Packham - the lack of messageboards haven't & will never stop me doing that! But also swooning for the wildlife too - any chance for a piece on wildflowers & how important they are? Pretty please... !

    Best of luck tonight team, I hope all goes off with a bang - not literally of course, that would never do! :)

  • Comment number 96.

    re the messageboard: When the BBC makes up its mind complaining won't help. The powers that be are always right. See Points of View or listen to Feedback.

    Our chicken had now laid 145 eggs.

    We saw a jay in our garden in St Albans today. The first in a couple of years.

  • Comment number 97.

    HI everyone, thank you for the explanation Sam about the messageboards, I do understand how hard it must have been for you.
    I don't like to complain as I do believe that you -the bbc- do know what you are doing, this time I would like to send my objection. I do feel that you are not taking into account the older contributors to your program. I learnt how to use the message boards right back at the start of Springwatch & have had a lot of fun talking too & learning from people on the messageboards. I do not do this tweeting & whenever I hear of "Facebook" trouble usually follows close behind so I won't be doing facebook either.
    I do feel that I will be excluded from Springwatch this year & that once again it is the young &"trendy " people that are being catered for.
    I really will miss all the friends I found & chatted too twice a year, I do wonder if for me Springwatch is over.

  • Comment number 98.

    There you go Sam and the Springwatch team and the BBC !!

    I think SUNNYLITTLEBEAR has said far more eloquently than many of us have been struggled to say.....lots of us feel excluded from the experience that was Springwatch....far wider than just watching the programmes, which are fantastic, interesting and informative. But the boards did give us an opportunity to meet up and share our experiences with people we felt we had got to know, allbeit in a "virtual world"

    Nothing else to say except thank you SUNNY and I do hope you get a response to your message....If, as we have been told, the team are monitoring and responding to our posts then I think that's the very least you deserve.

  • Comment number 99.

    can anybody help us,we have a Blue Tit nest in our neighbours house there nest is inside the wall cavity;and the chicks appear to of moved from near the nest entrance and got stuck lower down the wall behind a air vent .the parents are trying to feed there young through the vent and no longer entering the nest,any ideas of what we can do,we fear the chicks will starve,thanks

  • Comment number 100.

    At least for your sake Sunnylittle bear they change their minds. I am so upset. I still don't know where to put my photo of a mysterious bird. I have read some of these lovely comments and had a few laughs over the quips that have been made from certain people who used to make me laugh on the messageboard. I will miss that. They shouldn't do that to you Sunnylittlebear or to any of these lovely people on here. I know we all have to move on sometimes but we were quite comfortable where we were, thank you. Essential Rabbit made me laugh with not liking the facetwits! And Poppykok and the poems about wildlife. It was great. Were you under a different name Poppykok by the way? FYH have you seen any this year? I haven't. Sleepypenny have you started your wildlife garden yet. Arch it was great wasn't it thinking up wildlife names etc.? Skylark have you been singing lately? Winnie I still haven't any newts in my pond. How on earth am I going to cope without caching up with you all. And asking important questions. Unless someone comes up with a right idea of doing our own message board and keeping in touch and talking about the programme and then we'll decide if the Springwatch team can join us! Oh well I will definitely add my name to the list for keeping it open. I'll get on my knees! Its not too late. How on earth can they scroll up our messages on this one blog and sift along the comments. It'll be a headache. So please, please keep them open. You have so many people asking for it to be kept open what more do we have to do. Well, I'll talk later if you can find me amongst you all and will see what Springwatch is like tonight. Helen


Page 1 of 6

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.