IAN JAMES THOMPSON
Well-known member
Well I've just checked the jobs vacancies on the RSPB website and there still seems plenty of summer warden jobs to apply for. As many as in previous years.
Ian.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Controversy over the RSPB going to start charging a £5.00 fee for car parking (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter IAN JAMES THOMPSON
- Start date
Ian.
Farnboro John
Well-known member
IAN JAMES THOMPSON
Well-known member
Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
In line with my previous post, this seems very simple to me and the RSPB are just milking it
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/technology-44006602/what-is-gdpr-technology-explaine
A
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/technology-44006602/what-is-gdpr-technology-explaine
A
Farnboro John
Well-known member
OK: governments across the world are concerned about cyber-bullying on places like Facebook. That's evidence of large-scale wrongdoing on Facebook which is in the public domain, so hardly needs to be mentioned in every conversation about the subject. The behaviour you describe from North Wales, on Facebook, is basically cyber-bullying by locals against RSPB, corporately and/or personally against staff - obviously as a Facebook-phobe I've no experience of this, but you say it's there so fair enough. In my own experience (vicariously via my wife's account) I have seen sufficient examples of similar behaviour to be convinced that there is a problem, and if governments regard it as an international problem then I can accept that. To me that adds up to sufficient evidence to justify taking no notice on an intellectual level of bad behaviour on Facebook, and certainly not supposing it to be a representation of the population at large.
And I've fixed your sentence for you. 3
John
IAN JAMES THOMPSON
Well-known member
You always have to put some sarcasm in your posts, don’t you!OK: governments across the world are concerned about cyber-bullying on places like Facebook. That's evidence of large-scale wrongdoing on Facebook which is in the public domain, so hardly needs to be mentioned in every conversation about the subject. The behaviour you describe from North Wales, on Facebook, is basically cyber-bullying by locals against RSPB, corporately and/or personally against staff - obviously as a Facebook-phobe I've no experience of this, but you say it's there so fair enough. In my own experience (vicariously via my wife's account) I have seen sufficient examples of similar behaviour to be convinced that there is a problem, and if governments regard it as an international problem then I can accept that. To me that adds up to sufficient evidence to justify taking no notice on an intellectual level of bad behaviour on Facebook, and certainly not supposing it to be a representation of the population at large.
And I've fixed your sentence for you. 3
John
Ian
Deb Burhinus
Used to be well known! 😎
Beg to differ, it will have an impact, there will be members of the RSPB for example, who will take it as an opportunity to opt out of being contacted for campaign donations, volunteering, petitions etc, renewal of membership and it will provide an opportunity in recruiting new members to opt out of all of the above at the point of joining. It’s also a bit of a headache for those of us working within charitable organisations in terms of managing years of survey data carried out by other people!
andyadcock said:
Sorry you felt the need to do that but I assure you it’s laziness and not illiteracy. btw I don’t think a capital ‘i’ is required in ‘It’s’
andyadcock said:
Back to the topic, yes why not - eg April-Sept. I personally do not think the RSPB or any other conservation organisation should be offering car use as a basis for membership incentives. I suspect, however, the charges for a shuttle service would also prove to be unpopular but it might mitigate the need for overspill parking.
Last edited:
Farnboro John
Well-known member
Well, the RSPB is smart enough to recognise just how many of its members would likely disappear if they didn't get benefits from membership. And annual membership is a solid income stream that RSPB has to nurture.
On top of that, when you have with you a choice of suitable clothing and footwear for the various likely eventualities of British weather, plus cameras, bins, scopes and tripods, plus food, a bus is about as much use as a chocolate teapot when it comes to visiting an RSPB reserve. It's even more useless if you are going to visit a number of sites in a day, not all of them RSPB: and who wants to waste birding time waiting for a bus? Anyway, those of us who have friends often travel with high load factors (i.e. a car full) - which is an efficient use of fuel. More efficient than a shuttle bus with one person in it: and no bus service can afford to sit there waiting till it is full, passengers want prompt service. Unless demand is truly massive, shuttle buses are an inefficient use of planetary resources.
Plus it seems to me entirely reasonable that the RSPB should disincentivise those who do not support it, compared to those who do. Try thinking of it that way round.
John
Deb Burhinus
Used to be well known! 😎
I agree it’s not easy. In fact it’s very hard work and dictates a certain approach to birding that doesnt involve charging around or generally twitching everything the moment its on the news alerts, so often frustrating, backbreaking and requires a dogged determination. Im very fortunate living and working in Norfolk with so many friends and colleagues working in ornithology, it’s not much of an issue. I have the bonus of not having to take time off work for birding when my work quite often has taken me into the field anyway. Its more of an issue abroad on solo trips but then again, survey work abroad with a team has been a good get around for that one.
As far as proactively disincentivising non-members generally, I’m not sure whether that would be an effective strategy for any charitable organisation wanting to engage with the public with friendly outreach and in an inclusive manner with the purpose of promoting conservation and a love of wildlife.
There’s no right or wrong here, just different perspectives!
Farnboro John
Well-known member
I agree it’s not easy. In fact it’s very hard work and dictates a certain approach to birding that doesnt involve charging around or generally twitching everything the moment its on the news alerts, so often frustrating, backbreaking and requires a dogged determination. Im very fortunate living and working in Norfolk with so many friends and colleagues working in ornithology, it’s not much of an issue. I have the bonus of not having to take time off work for birding when my work quite often has taken me into the field anyway. Its more of an issue abroad on solo trips but then again, survey work abroad with a team has been a good get around for that one.
As far as proactively disincentivising non-members generally, I’m not sure whether that would be an effective strategy for any charitable organisation wanting to engage with the public with friendly outreach and in an inclusive manner with the purpose of promoting conservation and a love of wildlife.
There’s no right or wrong here, just different perspectives!
You are indeed lucky living and working in Norfolk. For the rest of us, a Norfolk trip involves a certain amount of research and planning to find out how to get the most from what may, in spring and summer at least, be 15 hours in the field plus a three hour drive at each end: so that efficient use of resources and time are at a premium even without "charging around" and despite the very helpful up-to-the-minute information supplied by news organisations that permits replanning on the way round (an option not available to those strait-jacketed by public transport or private shuttle buses). Life, in other words, is too short for the ordinary working birder with only a day or two a week to reach distant but attractive destinations to accept such limits.
I agree with you that conservation organisations have a balancing act to manage in terms of their members' expectations vs the public's goodwill: e.g. in the matter of discouraging sufficient non-members from parking at reserves so that members do not miss out and consequently withdraw from no longer cost-effective membership: depriving the organisation of the long-term income stream from annually renewing members.
John
Firstly I need to make it crystal clear that there has been nothing "chavvy" about the way that Anglesey residents have campaigned about the introduction of a flat rate £5 car parking charge at South Stack. Nor is it a bunch of morons jumping on a moving bandwagon. The campaign has been well run using social media as an effective communication tool. Other communication channels have also been engaged, ie the radio and the newspapers. The people heading up this campaign have not tolerated bad behaviour, ie there has been no spiteful or vicious posting. There has been no cyber bullying.
Anglesey is one of the poorest places in the UK. There are low rates of pay. The RSPB proposal is that there is a flat rate charge of £5 per car. It does not matter if you park for 10 minutes, or 6 hours, the charge will be £5. They have also stated they do not intend to honour Blue Badges either, and the parking charge still stands.
You cannot cut a Blue Badge off the back of a Cornflake packet. This precious badge is given to those of limited mobility and these people are normally at the lower end of the economic scale. Therefore the RSPB is penalising this sector of the community.
Many locals call in at South Stack to blow away the cobwebs. They admire the view, have a bit of a walk and then leave. A few will visit the RSPB cafe and buy a cup of coffee to support the RSPB. Some will buy presents from there too. If a £5 parking fee is introduced, coffee sales will drop. You can only spend £5 once. What is it to be? Parking? Or coffee? Or parking and bring a flask?
You might want to watch the council planning meeting on line. The RSPB stated that they had approx £90 - £100K shortfall on the site. A councillor asked how many cars they get. It was agreed 100,000. This makes half a million in revenue. It looks as though the RSPB is using South Stack as a cash cow? If they genuinely wish to cover this short fall then £1 parking charge would achieve that aim.
Here is a link to the council meeting: https://ynysmon.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/346446
The councillors are not happy about this. The land is leased. The majority of South Stack land was given to the people of Anglesey to enjoy free of charge.
The RSPB has not been overlooked by Wales. South Stack has received a lot of grants.
In summary, this has not been the RSPB's finest PR hour. They could have handled this so much better. They seem to be fiscally out of touch with average earnings on Anglesey.
It is good to read on here that there are people that are happy to pay £5 for parking. It is great that you are financially secure that you do not have to live from hand to mouth. But for others £5 is a lot of money to some people and families. It is the difference between eating tonight or having electricity.
Finally might I suggest that some of the posters on this thread take a leaf of out of the campaigners book and post in a polite, thoughtful and accurate manner too? Please get your facts right before posting. Thank you.
Anglesey is one of the poorest places in the UK. There are low rates of pay. The RSPB proposal is that there is a flat rate charge of £5 per car. It does not matter if you park for 10 minutes, or 6 hours, the charge will be £5. They have also stated they do not intend to honour Blue Badges either, and the parking charge still stands.
You cannot cut a Blue Badge off the back of a Cornflake packet. This precious badge is given to those of limited mobility and these people are normally at the lower end of the economic scale. Therefore the RSPB is penalising this sector of the community.
Many locals call in at South Stack to blow away the cobwebs. They admire the view, have a bit of a walk and then leave. A few will visit the RSPB cafe and buy a cup of coffee to support the RSPB. Some will buy presents from there too. If a £5 parking fee is introduced, coffee sales will drop. You can only spend £5 once. What is it to be? Parking? Or coffee? Or parking and bring a flask?
You might want to watch the council planning meeting on line. The RSPB stated that they had approx £90 - £100K shortfall on the site. A councillor asked how many cars they get. It was agreed 100,000. This makes half a million in revenue. It looks as though the RSPB is using South Stack as a cash cow? If they genuinely wish to cover this short fall then £1 parking charge would achieve that aim.
Here is a link to the council meeting: https://ynysmon.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/346446
The councillors are not happy about this. The land is leased. The majority of South Stack land was given to the people of Anglesey to enjoy free of charge.
The RSPB has not been overlooked by Wales. South Stack has received a lot of grants.
In summary, this has not been the RSPB's finest PR hour. They could have handled this so much better. They seem to be fiscally out of touch with average earnings on Anglesey.
It is good to read on here that there are people that are happy to pay £5 for parking. It is great that you are financially secure that you do not have to live from hand to mouth. But for others £5 is a lot of money to some people and families. It is the difference between eating tonight or having electricity.
Finally might I suggest that some of the posters on this thread take a leaf of out of the campaigners book and post in a polite, thoughtful and accurate manner too? Please get your facts right before posting. Thank you.
Last edited:
IAN JAMES THOMPSON
Well-known member
Ive just been reading on the website where there is a petition against the car park charging at South Stack Cliffs that the RSPB are appealing to the Planning Inspectorate to have car parking charges at South Stack Cliffs.
Ian.
Ian.
IAN JAMES THOMPSON
Well-known member
Does anyone know the date of the appeal by the RSPB over the car park charges at South Stack Cliffs?
Ian.
Ian.
IAN JAMES THOMPSON
Well-known member
It’s been published in the Daily Post in Wales that the RSPB have won the appeal to start car park charging at South Stack Cliffs.
Ian.
Ian.
