What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is
absolutely FREE
!
Register for an account
to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Forums
Birding
Conservation
Is RSPB our premier bird conservation organization any longer
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Robert Wallace" data-source="post: 3398307" data-attributes="member: 5690"><p>John your question is very difficult to answer. When I joined in 1973 it was primarily an organisation run by ornithologists or people with a deep love of birds and the membership reflected this but it was not not mainstream.Indeed when I was a boy birdwatchers were regarded as slightly odd in a well meaning way. In the late 70's and 80's birdwatching became much more popular endorsed by a plethora of celebrities. The late Eric Morecambe is a good example of what I mean. </p><p>Today birdwatching is both popular and mainstream and many people find birdwatching a pleasant leisure activity which does not necessarily require much effort. Today many well known bird reserves are almost "Nature Theme Parks" catering for the mass market. Membership of the RSPB has changed and because of the increased income many new reserves have been purchased but these still have to be managed which is costly.</p><p>I do not know what the social profile of the RSPB membership is, but mature, white middle class and small c conservative comes to mind. Visit a typical "honeypot" reserve to see what I mean. </p><p>Can the RSPB afford to upset it's membership by being controversial? I cannot see many RSPB members doing a mass trespass on the grouse moors, protesting against driven grouse shooting.</p><p>On another tangent I am slightly uncomfortable about the RSPB becoming and overarching "National Wildlife Trust" (Nature's Home etc). I fully accept that any conservation project will effect the overall ecology and that nature reserves need to sensitive to the big picture, I worry that the RSPB may be seen as taking over. </p><p>The various County Wildlife Trusts seem to be able to cope with nearly all the various strands of nature (wild flowers, fungi, butterflies, moths etc) without any problems so maybe it's just me. </p><p>John your simple question has raised many issues in my mind but I'm not sure about the best way forward.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Robert Wallace, post: 3398307, member: 5690"] John your question is very difficult to answer. When I joined in 1973 it was primarily an organisation run by ornithologists or people with a deep love of birds and the membership reflected this but it was not not mainstream.Indeed when I was a boy birdwatchers were regarded as slightly odd in a well meaning way. In the late 70's and 80's birdwatching became much more popular endorsed by a plethora of celebrities. The late Eric Morecambe is a good example of what I mean. Today birdwatching is both popular and mainstream and many people find birdwatching a pleasant leisure activity which does not necessarily require much effort. Today many well known bird reserves are almost "Nature Theme Parks" catering for the mass market. Membership of the RSPB has changed and because of the increased income many new reserves have been purchased but these still have to be managed which is costly. I do not know what the social profile of the RSPB membership is, but mature, white middle class and small c conservative comes to mind. Visit a typical "honeypot" reserve to see what I mean. Can the RSPB afford to upset it's membership by being controversial? I cannot see many RSPB members doing a mass trespass on the grouse moors, protesting against driven grouse shooting. On another tangent I am slightly uncomfortable about the RSPB becoming and overarching "National Wildlife Trust" (Nature's Home etc). I fully accept that any conservation project will effect the overall ecology and that nature reserves need to sensitive to the big picture, I worry that the RSPB may be seen as taking over. The various County Wildlife Trusts seem to be able to cope with nearly all the various strands of nature (wild flowers, fungi, butterflies, moths etc) without any problems so maybe it's just me. John your simple question has raised many issues in my mind but I'm not sure about the best way forward. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Birding
Conservation
Is RSPB our premier bird conservation organization any longer
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top