Current debates over the cinematic, cultural, ethical, and industrial foundations of wildlife and nature programs can be traced to its roots in early questions surrounding developments in visual media. Among  the first subjects captured on continuous-motion film during the late 1800s were animals. These early wildlife and nature films were more often perceived as anthropological and ethnographic documents than as entertainment or educational narratives. The cinematic records of distant cultures and wildlife also served as souvenirs for wealthy travelers who embarked on tourist-as­ ethnographer safaris. Continuing into the 20th century, cultural and social elites found documenting primitive nature a chic sign of modernity. It was not until the popular masses flooded movie theaters to see these first wildlife films, however, that they were established as a distinct and significant cinematic genre.

     The popularity of wildlife and nature programming certainly continued to grow as television entered the American home during the 1950s. During those formative television years, two large  categories  of wildlife and nature programs emerged, and though they still exist, they are neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive. The first branch, the nature documentary, follows the conventions of direct-cinema documentary filmmaking. These films involve little to no interference with the subject and focus on  simple, scientific documentation of the subject being filmed. The goal of such films is to enlighten audiences about some animal, culture , or environment. Thus, their entertainment value serves merely as a means to the primary goal of elucidation. Although any cinematic or videographic presentation involves selection and editing, these programs generally emphasize information and education over entertainment and sensationalism. The second type of wildlife and nature programming, the wildlife film, is more grounded in a "Hollywood model." These films employ narrative strategies, storytelling codes, and constructed dramatic structures to examine the subject being filmed. They provide little if any social commentary.

       Most wildlife and nature programs of either type are presented as and certainly fit basic documentary formats and can be further roughly subdivided into three related categories: tourism, scientific discovery, and environmental preservation. Of these categories, the first may be distinguished from purely educational or scientific inquiry because of its commercial connection. The last is also distinct because of its political motivation.

     Regardless of approach or type, most wildlife and nature programs, like other documentaries, have narrative elements. In the case of nature documentaries, the narrative elements rarely take precedence over the information or content being presented, while conversely, the content or information presented in wildlife films is often shaped to fit a narrative structure conceived prior to filming. In general, there are at least three narrative elements typically present in most wildlife and nature programs: (1) characterization and personification of animals; (2) the presence of struggle; and (3) the use of traditional, rather than experimental or innovative, narrative techniques. These elements are not mutually exclusive or exhaustive, and programs can apply several in a single episode.

     The characterization and personification of animals often occurs when programs give them "character names" or compare the animal's attributes with those of humans. Programs also frequently present and dramatize struggle in the wild. This struggle is intended to illustrate the constant battling forces of "brute nature." These accounts often uncover one or more of the following types of struggle: (1) protagonist versus antagonist; (2) hunter versus hunted; and (3) animals (protagonist) versus elements. The protagonist versus antagonist struggle presents one creature as the innocent (e.g. a naturally occurring species of bee) being attacked by another, unwelcome creature (e.g. the foreign killer bee, which is decimating bees native to the area). The hunter versus the hunted illustrates the "eternal" struggle between predator (e.g. fox) and prey (e.g. rabbit). Conflicts between wild animals and the environment may reveal how creatures adapt to continuing human encroachment on nature. Such programs usually present some ecological message concerning the importance of managed growth and respect for wildlife.

     Many programs also use a variety of traditional narrative techniques to construct their stories. A common device is the use of narrators not only to provide information but to add dramatic highlights and to help the story flow in a conventional manner. Programs also use audio tracks to emphasize action. Music often builds in intensity to underscore climactic moments, as when a predator seizes its prey. Slow motion, freeze-framing, cross-cutting between "characters" in a dramatic narrative-all these add qualities and evoke emotional and cognitive responses often associated with fiction and familiar from viewer knowledge of fictional presentations.

     Since most documentaries are shot on location, production costs are relatively high and grants or sponsorship of some kind are necessary to sustain them. On location, film crews are kept small and efficient to minimize costs. The director often doubles as stand-up and voice-over narrator. Equipment usually consists of a single camera, microphone, sound recorder, and lighting kit, where necessary.

     Wildlife and nature programming first appeared on U.S. television in 1948 with the success of a 15-minute science program called The Nature of Things. The series' success lasted until 1954 and paved the way for a host of nature programs to follow. From the start, the introduction of nature and wildlife programming attracted audiences as a "great escape." These programs were fun and exhilarating to watch and had viewers on the edge of their seats waiting for the commercial breaks to end and the show to resume. Programs such as 'Zoo Parade (1950-57), a half-hour Sunday­ afternoon series that looked at animals and animal behavior, included travel footage from such locations as the Amazon jungles. Another such program, Expedition (1960-63). documented journeys to various remote regions of the world and became known for presenting exciting and sometimes controversial  places around the globe: one episode presented a tribe in New Guinea ruled by Tambaran-the cult of the ghost that venerated the sweet potato. In another episode, Expedition presented an aboriginal Indian tribe that had never before seen a white man.

     After the success of adult-oriented programs such as Zoo Parade and Expedition, nature and wildlife shows changed strategies and focused attention on attracting younger audiences. Programs were often set up in a format designed to "introduce" the phenomena of wildlife and nature. Exploring ( 1962--66) targeted children ages five to 11 by using methods such as storytelling, mathematics, music, science, and history. Discovery (1962-71) searched the world for natural wonders, as did Zoo Parade and Expedition, but with the aim of attracting a younger audience. The Discovery series was designed to stimulate the cultural, historical, and intellectual curiosity of 7- to 12-year­ olds regarding nature. Young people were piloted through a spectrum of wonders including how animals use their tails, dramatized essays on the history of dance, the voyage of Christopher Columbus, and a visit to a Texas ranch, and they were introduced to the desert Native Americans. In keeping with the same format, First Look: Wonders of the World (1965-66) was designed to provide young children with an introduction to natural history, science, and the various inventions of the world. First Look's topics varied from exploring sea life to experiencing a simulated prehistoric expedition during the dinosaur period.

     From the 1960s through the 1970s, wildlife and nature programming introduced a new format designed to give audiences an "untamed" and "dangerous" view into the world of nature. Programs became more "adventurous" in their presentational style. Perhaps the best known and successful of such series was Wild Kingdom (1963-71 ), sponsored by Mutual of Omaha and hosted for most of its duration by Marlin Perkins. Wild Kingdom traveled to out-of-the way places in Africa, South America, the Arctic, Alaska, the continental United States, Canada, and the Soviet Union in search of unusual creatures and wild adventures. The series covered such diverse topics as animal survival in the wilds, treatment of animals in captivity, and the lives and habitats of animals and primitive people and their struggle for survival. Similar documentary series followed that focused on animals and their struggle for survival, including The Untamed World (1969-71); Wild, Wild World of Animals (1973-76); The World of Survival (1971); Safari to Adventure (1971-73); and Animal World (Animal Kingdom) (1968-80). Another such program was Jane Goodall and the World of Animal Behavior (1973-74). ABC aired several nature documentaries featuring Miss Goodall, who came to national attention as a scientist who lived among the apes. Here the scientist as "adventurer-hero" became a central narrative focus. Two successful efforts in her ABC series were "The Wild Dogs of Africa" (1973) and the "Baboons of Gombe" (1974), which attracted audiences with their "realism" and intimate visual portraits.

     To give audiences an alternative to the harsh realities of nature, wildlife programs added a sophisticated approach with the airing of such programs as the National Geographic Specials (1965- ). Produced in cooperation with the National Geographic Society, this long-running series of specials on anthropology, exploration, and biological, historical, and cultural subjects first aired on CBS (1965-73), then on ABC (1973-74), and currently can be seen on PBS (1975- ). The National Geographic Specials, in keeping with the traditions of the journal and the society that stand behind them, are noted for exceptional visual qualities. Another such program was Animal Secrets (1966-68), which disclosed the mysteries of wildlife behavior in an appealing nature series and explored such phenomena as how bees buzz, how fish talk, and why birds migrate. An episode titled "The Primates," filmed in Kenya, presented a study of baboons; their social order and living patterns were observed to find clues to the development of man. The high-quality film series Nova (1974-) also relies on detailed productions with exceptional production values. Nova is noted for examining complex scientific questions in a manner comprehensible to the layperson and in a relatively entertaining fashion. For the most part, the series concerns itself with the effects on nature and society of new developments in science. The close connection of this program with the Public Broadcasting Service has almost reached "brand" identification, and the program is often cited as an example of what PBS is and can do. For a short period of time, wildlife documentaries added a new frontier to the nature of inquiry by examining oceans and marine worlds. With the appearance of such programs as Water World (1972-75) and the very popular Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau, a new market was opened and added to the previous audience. The Undersea World centered around the scientific expeditions of Captain Jacques Cousteau and the crew of his specially equipped vessel, the Calypso. The first show began on ABC in 1968 and continued for nearly eight years. ABC dropped the series in 1976, but it continued on PBS with underwriting by the Atlantic Richfield Corporation. Since 1981, Cousteau's environmental series and specials have been produced for Turner Broadcasting System (TBS) in a number of short series.

     As the decade of the 1970s closed there was a movement toward bringing back traditional methods of presenting wildlife and nature programming-as if reintroducing the areas would stir up an interest in the subject. One such program, Animals, Animals, Animals (1976-81), explored the relationship of animals and man in order to help youngsters and inquiring adults understand various wildlife phenomena and the inter­ related scheme of nature. An entertainment focus was combined with an introduction to the world of science, zoology, and biology, and each episode focused on a particular animal in an exciting, yet simplistic manner. By the 1980s, a few wildlife and nature programs such as Nature (1982- ) and Wild America (1982- ) sustained the "adventurous" format that marked the era of the 1960s and 1970s. For the most part, however, 1980s programming appeared to make great strides when the focus was on ecology and "saving the planet." During this period, programs such as Universe (Walter Cronkite's Universe) (1980-82) and Life on Earth (1982) often focused on space-the solar system and beyond-in order to understand the phenomena of nature and society.

     Another major advancement in wildlife and nature programming occurred in 1985 when the Discovery Channel, an all-documentary cable network, was launched into homes across the nation. This network was devoted chiefly to presenting documentaries on nature, science-technology, travel, history, and human adventure-finally, there was something for everyone. In 1990 the Discovery Channel's penetration passed the 50 million mark, making it one of the fastest growing cable networks of all time. Today, the Discovery Channel has become an alternative outlet for the kind of nature and wildlife programming that in the 1980s had to depend on public television for exposure. With the success of Discovery Channel, another cable network has joined the nature campaign. Nickelodeon (1979- ), a children's programming network, recently teamed with SeaWorld of Florida to educate young people about the importance of conserving Earth's natural resources, protecting endangered species, preventing pollution, and recycling. In the 1990s, Nickelodeon's Cable in the Classroom service and Sea World's Shamu TV: Sea World Video Classroom service began providing hands-on programs about sea life and ecology for audiences from preschoolers to college postgraduates.

     A number of programs focused on nature and wildlife have stepped beyond the most common U.S. television goals of entertaining and informing. They have attempted not only to support the preservation of species and environments but to hold corporations and government agencies accountable for acts of pollution and destruction. Films of this type often record dramatic confrontations between those who seek to conserve and those who seek to exploit the environment. The environmental activist group Greenpeace, for example, adopts as part of its policy the need to identify and protest callous indifference toward animals and the environment, and it has used such films to great advantage. It remains to be seen whether television will eventually be used in a similar manner, whether "na­ ture" will continue to be presented either as an entertaining commodity or as an exotic topic for popular education.

     As of the beginning of the 21st century. Some cable and satellite channels are fully dedicated to the study of animals and nature, namely, the Discovery Channel and Animal Planet. BBC America also provides access to magnificent documentaries on a variety of environmental and nature topics. The audience segmentation reflected by the growth of such channels has given wildlife and nature programs a stature and importance of their own and has led to further subdivisions within the general categories.

     The increasing popularity of "reality  television" also seems to be causing a shift in the content of some nature genres. There is a movement away from objective, unobtrusive observation of nature (from a safe distance) to subjective or invasive involvement with nature (dangerously close at hand). In the first kind, as we have seen above, the recorded drama usually consists of conflict between animals themselves; in the second, the recorded drama consists of conflict between naturalist and quarry. Sadly, the more dangerous the exposure or risky the involvement, the more fascinating it is to the audience.

     The entertaining wildlife format, for example, has led to development of a new subgenre of wildlife and nature programming that can be called the "extreme" wildlife program. Extreme wildlife programming began with Marty Stouffer's Wild America, which ran on PBS for 12 years. Wild America featured Stouffer's treks into nature and his encounters with wildlife and emphasized the more violent aspects of nature, including a high ratio of attack and hunting scenes. Stouffer's show faced criticism in the 1990s for being too violent and for staging some of the predator-versus-prey scenes, and it was eventually canceled by PBS, though reportedly for unrelated reasons.

     Perhaps the most successful example of extreme wildlife programming is the Animal Planet's Crocodile Hunter. This show features Australian zoo director Steve Irwin and his excursions in the wilderness, aggressively chasing down and capturing extremely dangerous animals, such as cobras, scorpions, rattlers, and, of course, crocodiles. The growing popularity of extreme wildlife programs like Crocodile Hunter­ which hosts a fan club, sells videos and other related merchandise, and has even been turned into a fictional, full-length motion picture-seems to demonstrate audiences' craving for this new, exciting subgenre. Such programs also illustrate a new trend in wildlife and nature programming, toward increasing use of interaction and interference with wildlife rather than documentation in an observational mode. It should be noted that Animal Planet's parent channel, the Discovery Channel, offers a tamer version of Crocodile Hunter, which also features an Aussie and his outdoor adventures, titled Nigel's Wild, Wild World.

     Hosts of the more extreme shows, such as Irwin or Jeff Corwin, prove their bravery and daring by capturing animals in the wild and holding them up to the camera for close inspection. There is no doubt that the close encounter with the animals provides a more intimate knowledge of them, but the exposure seems of lesser importance than the human struggle to capture them. The "bravery" that is involved, no matter how well intended, borders on foolhardiness, for hosts are often bitten or stung or clawed in the process. In the older type of nature films (for example, David Atten­ borough 's documentaries) the host was generally a spectator who hardly ever placed himself or herself in danger. It was a matter of principle not to interfere with the natural processes being filmed for aesthetic and scientific reasons.

     Thus, in spite of audience demand for more wildlife and nature programming, questions regarding the accuracy, the purpose, and even the veracity of the programming have emerged. Because these programs have the potential to influence millions of viewers with their interpretations of nature, their accuracy stands as an important point of contention. At the core of the discussion is a central question: Are wildlife and nature programs documentaries, with a primary goal of documentation and education, or are they carefully constructed narratives with a primary goal of entertaining audiences rather than educating them? Within this context the definition, description, and classification of wildlife and nature programs continue to be examined within the television industries as well as in commentary surrounding the forms.

     Though the newer breed of naturalists' enthusiasm for their quest, and their admiration of the beauty of nature, can hardly be questioned, the risks they take seem to border on sensationalism and contrived hero­ ism, rather than love of nature or dispassionate observation. It can only be hoped that the public's fascination with such reality television will diminish and be replaced with a renewed interest in the natural world and its conservation.