The final product of the nature videographer can be a work of fiction, however this is not usually the case. Most nature programs purport to represent nature, more or less accurately. Thus there is a responsibility on the part of the producer of the program to ensure that what is being presented is an accurate and a realistic representation.
The first issue is that of accuracy. We at TERRA are biologists first and videographers second. We strive to ensure that all our narration is scrupulously correct. We check and double check data. We ask friends to check after we have checked. Even with all of the checking, we know that a few mistakes will creep in. But we do feel a great sense of responsibility to present a program that is as accurate as we can make it. Many nature programs have a very high degree of professionalism and the content is biologically correct. But....there are some programs that make it to the air that are of dubious biological veracity (this is being very polite!). Mistakes after mistakes pile up. Evidently the persons making the program were not adequately enough trained in biology to write the program script or the narration.
As a potential nature videographer, make sure that your knowledge of the subjects you are taping is up to par. You will need that knowledge both in the actual taping and in the producing of the program. Remember, producing a videotape is not at all like taking still photographs and selling them. Producing a videotape is more like writing a book. Do you feel your knowledge of the subject is enough to write a book on it? If not, get somebody who could write a book on the subject to help. After all, if you're not a musician you are not likely to write the score for your production are you? The same applies to the script and the narration. If you are not very familiar with the topic you are taping: get help!
The second issue is that of the honesty of the program and it is more difficult to judge. Let's use a completely hypothetical example. You are doing a program about wolves in Algonquin Provincial Park in Ontario. Let's say that your script and your narration are all technically accurate. The only problem is that you have no footage of wolves from Algonquin. You use some footage of wild wolves you have from a spot in Quebec that looks like Algonquin and a lot of footage from captive wolves in a confined area that looks natural. Is that acceptable? The obvious totally frank solution is to clearly state where the footage came from. That doesn't tend to happen in many programs produced. Footage of captive animals are often used in such a way as to suggest that it is footage of wild animals. We have no specific recommendations regarding honesty in programming. Each producer will have to make their own decisions. Keep the question in your mind however and remember the differences between fiction programs and programs that purport to show reality.