So, again, why not just donate the money to preserve the rainforests?
We're being told time and again that we must act now, change our behaviour, cut carbon emissions and limit worldwide travel to necessities and not luxuries, especially flights. If you book a ticket, you're adding to the demand, sinple as that. And most speices on the planet are at risk from climate change, not just a few endemics in Peru. That's the message.
If you believe that, and most of the World's climate scientists are endorsing the message, then you cannot square it with a meaningless arbitrary quest to see as many bird species as possible in a year. You simply can't. All that travel isn't necessary, they could just stay where they are with a box set of Life of Birds, remortage the house etc and give the proceeds to whatever rainforest they wish (£200k, the average house price in the UK, would probably buy quite a bit of forest in Peru or pay the salaris of a few rangers). They're going twitching, on a grand scale. Lovely for them, but the RSPB (their former employer) is a bit worried about the impact of travel on birds:
Climate change poses the greatest long-term threat to birds and other wildlife. In 2004, the transport sector accounted for 27% of the UK's carbon dioxide emissions. Transport is now the fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions in the UK - with harmful emissions growing at a much faster rate than those from, for example, domestic energy use.
http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/policy/climatechange/solutions/transport/index.asp
Maybe that's why they've given up their jobs? Seeing as they'll be spending most of the year in transit, and not much it will be on bikes, I doubt the RSPB is endorsing their adventure. Or do they not know best either?
EDIT: a quick trawl of the RSPB site makes no mention of the jaunt of their recent ex-employee. You'd have thought they'd have been right there on the bandwagon, if they agreed with it. Or perhaps I've missed it?