To be honest, I think the RSPB have just about got the balance right with the way they allocate money for various projects...
In the last few years in the UK, as well as buying new land for future reserves, the RSPB have ploughed a lot of money into developing land management schemes with exisiting land owners and also setting up partnership projects like the scheme at Dovestones.
I'm all for the projects in Chile, Sumatra and India...All third world countries, with very little money to spend on conservation and perhaps also in need of educating in regards of the importance of protecting wildlife. I have no doubt what so ever, that we will lose many species of birds if we don't try to help these countries.
Anthony
Tony Coatsworth said
Sat Jun 26 5:11 PM, 2010
Royal Society for the Protection of BIRDS (not UK resident birds, or summer visitors or winter visitors, but all birds). It was originally founded over concerns of the use of exotic feathers for the hat trade so covered all manner of species like Egrets which at the time were 'exotic' foreign species.
However I agree that they should spend the majority of their resources on protecting birds likely to reach our shores or birds in UK Dependencies e.g Albatrosses and Penguins, because I guess the vast majority of the membership are of the 'Robin feeding brigade' and probably don't give a toss about Asian vultures on the edge of extinction.
The RSPB are partners of Birdlife International which addresses things like the vulture issue, and so they do have a duty to tell the membership about their involvement.
Paul Wilson said
Sat Jun 26 4:47 PM, 2010
Perhaps if they spent MORE money overseas, we'd see more Turtle Doves etc. here.
Ian Woosey said
Sat Jun 26 3:55 PM, 2010
Reet. The weather is scorching. I`m tetchy. I`m in the mood for a rant....
I have received through my door today the "Impact" magazine from the RSPB. They send it out to members who actively campaign/donate to specific projects. I (sometimes) do the latter, hence the receipt of the said rag. This quarter (Summer 2010) contains eight updates about ongoing campaigns - three of which are OVERSEAS - (1) Helping Chile`s seabirds, (2) The management of a rainforest in Sumatra, (3) The vulture programme in India.
Now, this is MY rant (and my PERSONAL opinion); I, for one (I am a life-member), DO NOT fund the RSPB to do overseas work - I am of the opinion that those who it affects closest should deal with it themselves !! Money that you donate (if you are a member, of course) through your regular subscriptions will, for all I know, get channelled into work like this without you realizing it. There are problems right on our doorstep that need IMMEDIATE ACTION from the RSPB (see here for example - http://raptorpolitics.org.uk/).
I have come to the conclusion that the RSPB are in a league of their own when it comes to managing wildlife reserves - but give them a problem to face (which is of NATIONAL IMPORTANCE) and they just buckle...
Rant over. Please add your view, have a nice day, and enjoy the cricket tomorrow
-- Edited by Ian Woosey on Saturday 26th of June 2010 04:18:09 PM
In the last few years in the UK, as well as buying new land for future reserves, the RSPB have ploughed a lot of money into developing land management schemes with exisiting land owners and also setting up partnership projects like the scheme at Dovestones.
I'm all for the projects in Chile, Sumatra and India...All third world countries, with very little money to spend on conservation and perhaps also in need of educating in regards of the importance of protecting wildlife.
I have no doubt what so ever, that we will lose many species of birds if we don't try to help these countries.
Anthony
However I agree that they should spend the majority of their resources on protecting birds likely to reach our shores or birds in UK Dependencies e.g Albatrosses and Penguins, because I guess the vast majority of the membership are of the 'Robin feeding brigade' and probably don't give a toss about Asian vultures on the edge of extinction.
The RSPB are partners of Birdlife International which addresses things like the vulture issue, and so they do have a duty to tell the membership about their involvement.
I have received through my door today the "Impact" magazine from the RSPB. They send it out to members who actively campaign/donate to specific projects. I (sometimes) do the latter, hence the receipt of the said rag. This quarter (Summer 2010) contains eight updates about ongoing campaigns - three of which are OVERSEAS - (1) Helping Chile`s seabirds, (2) The management of a rainforest in Sumatra, (3) The vulture programme in India.
Now, this is MY rant (and my PERSONAL opinion); I, for one (I am a life-member), DO NOT fund the RSPB to do overseas work - I am of the opinion that those who it affects closest should deal with it themselves !! Money that you donate (if you are a member, of course) through your regular subscriptions will, for all I know, get channelled into work like this without you realizing it. There are problems right on our doorstep that need IMMEDIATE ACTION from the RSPB (see here for example - http://raptorpolitics.org.uk/).
I have come to the conclusion that the RSPB are in a league of their own when it comes to managing wildlife reserves - but give them a problem to face (which is of NATIONAL IMPORTANCE) and they just buckle...
Rant over. Please add your view, have a nice day, and enjoy the cricket tomorrow
-- Edited by Ian Woosey on Saturday 26th of June 2010 04:18:09 PM