, via Wikimedia Commons”]
Marmite – you may love it or hate it.
Wildlife NGOs – you may love them or hate them.
The results of the polls on this website over your favourite and least favourite wildlife NGOs produced a lot of interesting results.
I guess it doesn’t really matter that much to Marmite how many people hate them, provided lots of people love them. The more people love them, the more Marmite is sold. If the people who don’t buy Marmite just dislike it slightly or hate it doesn’t matter too much provided there is a big enough pool of Marmite lovers out there. To sell Marmite you need to find lots of Marmite lovers and get them hooked.
Now wildlife NGOs aren’t quite the same as Marmite, but I think that there are some parallels. The fact that the RSPB scored more positive votes than any of the other listed organisations is significant. But is the high number of negative votes significant too – or should the RSPB shrug it off as unimportant?
I think the difference between the RSPB and Marmite is that the RSPB has to try to persuade governments, civil servants, land owners and others that it has good ideas and that could mean that lots of people hating you is a bad idea. Or is it?
I think it depends – things usually do! It depends on why people dislike you. If they dislike you because of your core principles and because you are trying to to changes things and they don’t want change – then it just goes with the territory.
I am a big believer in what Winston Churchill said on this subject: You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.
If I was universally popular I’d be mortified, it would mean I wasn’t doing my job properly. I am proud to have been referred to as ‘the nightmare woman’ and I am told there is some rude graffito about me on a shooting box on the Coast to Coast walk! No problem about that, I have never got on with the grouse shooting fraternity.
Kate – well said! But you aren’t universally unpopular either!
I’m not sure you can assume people are against what the RSPB stands for. There were easier targets on the list, sure, but perhaps some people think that the size of the RSPB is a bad thing (because it can go it alone) or that it is trying to muscle in on someone else’s niche. E.g the YOC becoming wildlife explorers. I’ve always had the impression, possibly erroneously, that the RSPB is quite inward looking and could be better at working with other orgs.
The RSPB rightly says you can’t conserve birds in isolation but at any site you have to make decisions on what you will manage it for and obviously the birds will come first. If your priority is beetles or flowers, you might think the RSPB has too much power or influence on policymakers?
I didn’t vote for them BTW! Not trying to stir, the RSPB is good at what it does but there’s always room for improvement. Like many who read this blog, my instinct will be to support other orgs doing good work rather than the RSPB because I know that the RSPB will do ok as it is well known and supported by the general public – to their great credit of course.
Rustica – welcome and thank you for a really good comment.
Sadly many of the so called enemies are other conservationists. One of the reason being the lack of listening by the RSPB. One great example is that the RSPB membership could be 2 million but with a 15% drop out rate and lack of leadership at the top many long term members no longer fell the need to join. Their latest news sheet on the Hen Harrier is just one of the points. A spade is a spade and the death of Hen Harriers is caused by the Red Grouse moors taking the law into their own hands knowing there is little chance of being caught.
One word. True !!
Andy – one word. Thanks!!
Find myself agreeing with every word you said today Mark.Love the RSPB except this issue of them standing back from the e-petition and guess they are sick of me raising it so I have probably made another enemy when sadly we are really on the same side.Find it really confusing as I think they are perhaps saying that Vicarious Liability does not include big shooting estates which all my reading of the subject it seems to.Think they may well have something else to promote in a similar vein in the near future so taking a bit of a back seat when I think your Winston quote is appropriate.
I agree with John that RSPB has failed to respond to changing circumstances – but then its in (not particualrly !) good company with most of the other NGOs ! And whilst he may not be happy with the HH leaflet (which I haven’t seen) I feel strongly that RSPB speaks out more clearly and without fear or favour than any other main stream, major conservation body. So I’ll be staying a member and I would urge others to do the same: we all have warts (figuratively speaking, I’m not getting personal !) and for me the plusses of what RSPB does hugely outweigh the minuses.
So the Wildlife Trusts are quite popular with this eclectic readership and also not hated much. Guess that makes us more jam than marmite but I’ve always been more or a savoury man than a sweet man. Hmmm………. Maybe there’s a lesson in here for the Wildlife Trusts that we need to be a bit more outspoken and a bit more radical in our thinking. As for RSPB, I’ve been a member since I was two and will probably be a member when I die.
In reality, us conservation types really love all the NGOs who do brilliant work most of the time (and of course we mess up occasionally – who doesn’t?).
Rob – thank you very much for that.