POLL: Is The RSPB worth Joining ? (1 Viewer)

[scampo]

To quote the RSPB history ( http://www.rspb.org.uk/about/history/milestones.asp )
"1891 The Didsbury group and ladies attending Mrs Phillips' Fur and Feather meetings at her house in Croydon amalgamate to become the Society for the Protection of Birds."

They didn't start off Royal. More like "ladies who lunch".

An honourable history indeed - very interesting. Thanks for the link, Alastair.

I wonder if the ladies were wearing their fox furs and feather boas at the time. Sounds as if they had fun.

 

[christineredgate]

"What about the small fry as it were.The lesser known groups who take in injured birds(many of which are referred by the RSPB).They receive very little funding,certainly none at the level of the RSPB.They rely on jumble sales and coffee mornings,school children doing their little bit.Every penny they can muster goes soley on the livestock they are helping."

I fear their coffee mornings and jumble sales will be a complete failure as they don't appear to use any funds to advertise these events...or do they? If they do use any of their funds on advertising/ marketing fund raising events then I don't see how they are doing anything different to the RSPB, it's just a matter of scale.

The RSPB was once a tiny organisation run by volunteers.

Dave

No,Dave,their fund raising efforts are not a complete failure.Also they do not need funds to advertise,local shops,school notice boards,peoples front windows etc. are used for this purpose These are small voluntary groups whose sole concern is for the animals /birds they are rescueing,and either nursing back to health before releasing into the wild,or in the case of domestic pets,re homing.
The criteria to be adhered to re rules and regulations these days,where everthing is bound by red tape etc,makes it impossible for these groups to be part of large charities,such as the RSPB or the RSPCA.All I am saying is they need as much support as the main charities.One cannot possibly support all charities and groups ,so one must choose as one thinks best.The purpose of this thread was asking if one thought the RSPB was a worthwhile charity to support.All I am pointing out is that there are many other small groups which are just as worthwhile.Sometimes people can resent that a specific cause is being pushed in their face ,so to speak,and will back off to another direction.

 

[Suffolkringer]

Membership Money raises the RSPB approx £30mill a year!! Much needed funds to maintain there fantastic reserves... Even when the rares do disappear the day before you can get there! Still amazing places though. Cant think of anywhere I can relax more than an RSPB reserve!!! Also just as a side note, approx 60% of RSPB members never visit a reserve, they just like to know there money is going to conserve birds and the environment, and they know the RSPB is (allegerdly) the best at doing it.

 

[Anthony Morton]

To quote the RSPB history ( http://www.rspb.org.uk/about/history/milestones.asp )
"1891 The Didsbury group and ladies attending Mrs Phillips' Fur and Feather meetings at her house in Croydon amalgamate to become the Society for the Protection of Birds."

They didn't start off Royal. More like "ladies who lunch".

I always understood that one of the group's original aims (there may have been others) was to stop the trade in exotic feathers which miliners were using in huge numbers to decorate ladies' hats.

 

[Nightranger]

I always understood that one of the group's original aims (there may have been others) was to stop the trade in exotic feathers which miliners were using in huge numbers to decorate ladies' hats.

Spot on Anthony but I understand the remit spread very quickly and most of the current areas of issue were in place by the time of the Royal charter.

 

[pete1950]

'I always understood that one of the group's original aims (there may have been others) was to stop the trade in exotic feathers which miliners were using in huge numbers to decorate ladies' hats.'

If my memory serves me, I think they were instrumental is saving the G C Grebe.

 

[dj1947]

a must

Same Rules apply, civilised debate NO personal attacks please.

every area have there own club u meet some nice people and get lots of info
dj

 

[Andrew-Bede]

Just received my renewal notice for membership of RSPB, £29 for a year’s individual membership, that is less than 8p a day! WOW what fantastic value! Free entry for over 100 reserves, a magazine four times a year and contributing to conservation work which is ultimately beneficial to everyone. I can’t see how any birder can not join.

Andrew-Bede

 

[Elizabeth Bigg]

Just received my renewal notice for membership of RSPB, £29 for a year’s individual membership, that is less than 8p a day! WOW what fantastic value! Free entry for over 100 reserves, a magazine four times a year and contributing to conservation work which is ultimately beneficial to everyone. I can’t see how any birder can not join.

Andrew-Bede

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

How about making it a Direct Debit, so admin costs will be reduced too? (I hope you have already signed a Gift Aid declaration to help even more)?

 

[Andrew-Bede]

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

How about making it a Direct Debit, so admin costs will be reduced too? (I hope you have already signed a Gift Aid declaration to help even more)?

yes to both!
Andrew-Bede

 

[deeestuary]

Definitely. As are the Wildlife Trusts and any other conservation organisation you might name.
The RSPB do a lot of good and I would venture to say that the state of birds - and the public awareness of their problems - would be a lot worse if it weren't for the RSPB and other bodies.
I do agree with Marek though - I would like to see less of the leaflets and raffle tickets copious amounts of which fall out of the magazine! Birds itself isn't a bad magazine and I think it does a good job in keeping the membership (and patients in doctors' and dentists' waiting rooms!) informed of how the RSPB's campaigns, etc, are progressing.

But all the adverts in birds plus leaflets and raffle tickets etc. means that the publication of Birds pays for itself. And for a large percentage of the membership getting the magazine one of the most important reasons for joining in the first place. I know many birders look down their noses at Birds but I have to say I always thoroughly enjoy it.
Richard Smith www.deeestuary.co.uk

 

[scampo]

But all the adverts in birds plus leaflets and raffle tickets etc. means that the publication of Birds pays for itself. And for a large percentage of the membership getting the magazine one of the most important reasons for joining in the first place. I know many birders look down their noses at Birds but I have to say I always thoroughly enjoy it.
Richard Smith www.deeestuary.co.uk

It's not only readable but the photography is stunning at times. I think it hits the mark for the average member but does lack both reviews and a section for the high end birder. I should think its production costs are high, too. It certainly has the feel of a publication that's put together mainly in-house which has advantages for quality but disadvantages for costs.

I would like to see it posted in recyclable paper rather than in ground filling plastic!

 

[Nelbert]

I'm a member again after lapsing for a few years.

To be honest, I've worked for a number of Environmental charities, and one of the reasons I left was the rather unhealthy (as I saw it) competition it saw itself in with other large wildlife and environmental charities - never mentioned publically, but it was there bubbling under the surface. I'm certainly glad I rejoined, but they won't ever replace my true love, which is the County Wildlife Trust movement - I actually like doing a bit of habitat management and for that reason I've always kept my Lincs WT membership up.

Certainly if you just want to suport large-scale conservation work and visit nature reserves, there's no real reason for not joining. As far as raffle tickets and such like is concerned, the Charity Commission dictate how much a charity can spend on admin and promotion, and it isn't a very large proportion of their income. Charities are run under a regulatory and legislative framework more robust than almost any other area of British business.