I just lately wrote to the RSPB’s new Chair of Council, Sir Andrew Cahn, with a listing of 10 questions on what the RSPB is as much as lately – click on right here. I acquired a response on Friday and right here I put up the RSPB’s solutions to the primary 4 of my questions with extra to comply with tomorrow and Thursday with a view to do justice to Sir Andrew’s response.
I’m grateful to Sir Andrew for his fairly speedy, open and pretty detailed response. It’s a good and relatively elegant response. There are bits of it that please me loads, and bits that I don’t agree with a lot, however such is life. I don’t have to agree with the RSPB on every part to assist it like I don’t have to agree with the Labour Occasion on every part (and barely do) to be a member and I don’t have to agree with Chris Packham on every part to be mates with him.
Sir Andrew’s response makes me really feel higher concerning the RSPB so it was value it for me to put in writing, and (since I actually am revising my will) it could effectively have been value it to the RSPB for Sir Andrew to answer like this. I hope you’ll discover the RSPB response attention-grabbing and helpful to you.
So, right here we go together with the primary 4 questions, Sir Andrew’s (ie the RSPB’s) responses and my ideas on the responses.
Pricey Sir Andrew,
Congratulations on turning into Chair of RSPB Council, though I’ve to say that on the on-line AGM I voted in opposition to your appointment, not as a result of I’ve something in opposition to you personally however as a result of I do know virtually nothing about you however I didn’t very similar to the look of your provenance. You seem like a really institution determine (from the data above) and that’s the very final thing the RSPB wants from its management (IMHO). Your WWF background is especially unsuited to a land-owning and land-managing conservation physique just like the RSPB, and WWF is much too near some relatively nasty industries to my thoughts. However I hope you’ll be sensible as RSPB Chair because the RSPB is becalmed within the doldrums proper now.
I can’t think about you understand any extra about me than I find out about you so just a few phrases of introduction. I’m an RSPB Life Member (though they’re referred to as Life Fellows which appears each pretentious and a tad gender-biased for lately) and I first joined the RSPB as a YOC member in c1970. I labored for the RSPB from 1986-2011 with the latter half of that interval as conservation director. I write a weblog (on which this letter to you’ll be posted, alongside along with your reply), have written a number of books (my ebook Combating for Birds (2012) will inform you extra concerning the RSPB within the Nineteen Eighties-2011 than most present employees may inform you) and my ebook Reflections (2023) is fairly complimentary concerning the RSPB and units out my ideas on the state of UK nature conservation. I’m a founder and co-director of the campaigning organisation Wild Justice.
Sufficient about me, besides to say that I’m, I actually am (I’m not simply saying it), about to evaluation my will and I will likely be contemplating charitable donations. My mom handed away this spring and I’ve inherited some cash, a few of which has already gone to native charities, nationwide Alzheimer’s charities and one UK conservation charity (not RSPB) so that is your probability to impress me by your response to this missive.
By the best way, I’ve seen among the responses that others have acquired from you and heard how the recipients felt about them. It’s unclear whether or not you may have seen, not to mention authorized, the responses despatched out. Possibly the RSPB may spend money on an electronic mail handle in order that your title is hooked up to responses in order that it’s clear that you could take accountability for his or her content material? Within the absence of such a technological repair, maybe you might need a line within the response to this electronic mail which says one thing alongside the strains of ‘Sir Andrew has seen and authorized this response’?
I’m not going to ask concerning the monetary evaluation being carried out, primarily however not solely involving expenditure on nature reserves, as I’m positive you already respect that a large number of RSPB members and supporters will likely be watching with nice curiosity and present anxiousness to see how that performs out.
Thanks on your letter and your congratulations on my appointment.
Regardless of your preliminary misgivings I do hope that over the course of my tenure you will notice my appointment as a superb resolution. I’ve a love for wildlife and wild locations and am keenly conscious that the character disaster alongside local weather change is among the greatest threats to our future. When it comes to my suitability, admittedly I’m not a birder nor a profession conservationist however I do assume that my expertise with massive, advanced organisations, previous work on agricultural coverage in Authorities and time with different main charities signifies that I’ve loads to contribute to the organisation and the broader debate. We’d like each the private and non-private sectors to considerably up their contribution to nature restoration, if we’ve got any hope of turning this disaster round. And I feel I can play a component.
I’m just a few weeks into the brand new function after all and nonetheless very a lot within the studying part. Lots of the points you increase, as you understand, are the accountability of the Govt Group, so I’ve had some assist from RSPB colleagues with the solutions to your questions beneath.
Listed below are my questions. I’ve restricted them to 10 (though some have a number of components).
- When was the final time you have been on the RSPB’s HQ, The Lodge? What are the plans for the advanced there, buildings, gardens and the SSSI?
I final visited the Lodge in late October and amongst different issues, I used to be there to get an replace on the way forward for the location. The character reserve is doing very well, continues to develop and I’m happy to say that we are going to be there for the foreseeable future. We have now a long-term settlement with CEMEX, the place we tackle administration of sections of the neighbouring quarry web site as CEMEX finishes with them. All instructed it’s going to be the biggest heathland restoration within the south-east. There have been breeding Nightjar in recent times, the odd Dartford Warbler showing (hopefully sooner or later truly colonising) and the introduction of ponies for among the yr has helped with heathland upkeep.
The constructing and backyard advanced is much less simple. For the reason that pandemic, and our transfer to hybrid working, it’s not being utilized by employees on the identical scale or in the identical approach as earlier than. It’s actively used as a spot for conferences, workshops and collaboration and there are some groups reminiscent of IT, Conservation Information, Authorized and Supporter Companies who nonetheless use the location as an workplace base, however we’ve needed to shut among the unused buildings within the face of rising utility prices. The longer-term future for these buildings is underneath evaluation however I don’t count on to see any main modifications within the quick time period. However clearly, we recognise that issues can’t stay as they presently are into the long run.
All of that sounds smart and it illustrates the difficulties of deciding on the way forward for some websites. That is an iconic handle and for on a regular basis I’ve identified the RSPB, The Lodge, Sandy, Beds has been its HQ. It doesn’t have to remain like that, in any case, who’s grieving over the transfer of the RSPB from close to Victoria Coach Station to the present location within the early Sixties? Nobody, and the transfer was wanted for growth and now there could be want for retraction – by way of a altering world but in addition by way of choices already made on hybrid or residence working.
This web site is an asset and a legal responsibility. It has a listed constructing, listed gardens and an SSSI hooked up and all of that might be very engaging to many patrons so near a railway station with a prepare into London at 40mins distance (on a superb day). However many patrons wouldn’t need a variety of workplace area or the employees canteen or such a big automobile park on the finish of the slim drive. Deciding what to do will likely be rather more troublesome than closing some stores (and sure, there’s one among them on the prime of the driveway too).
Hardly anybody now working at The Lodge, and probably not Sir Andrew may have a replica of John Gooders’s The place to Watch Birds, printed 1967, however I do and my first go to to the location was as a schoolboy in 1970 I assume. The ebook lists Nightjar, Redstart, Tree Pipit, Lesser Noticed Woodpecker and Woodcock as current in summer time. As a employees member I solely noticed Woodcock within the 25 years I used to be primarily based on the Lodge and I’m unsure they’re nonetheless there. I’m glad the Nightjars are again and I’ve seen Dartford Warbler there too – indicators of fixing instances.
2. Does the RSPB intend so as to add an in-person AGM to the web model for 2025? I feel you need to.
We don’t. By the point the pandemic hit, numbers attending the in-person AGMs had declined and the lockdown restrictions gave us an opportunity to attempt a unique mannequin of occasion. I respect it’s not everybody’s cup of tea however the suggestions we’ve got had from nearly all of attending members (a rise on the numbers that attended the in-person occasion) has been overwhelmingly constructive (89% from the 2023 occasion), each when it comes to the format and the convenience of attending for these from a far wider geographic space. And it’s additionally saving us cash. May it’s improved? Completely, and we are going to proceed to evolve the format. For instance, I feel that we may in all probability do extra to make use of it to spotlight our conservation successes and challenges and the Q&A piece with Board members might be longer and extra in depth, however the on-line model is right here to remain for now.
Clear reply – I just like the agency ‘We don’t’ at the start. Can’t get clearer than that. Though I feel for quite a lot of causes (see right here) it’s the fallacious reply. I feel RSPB employees are dropping contact with one another and in addition they’re dropping contact with the membership. There’s nothing like placing in your go well with and speaking to a great deal of folks you’ve by no means met earlier than concerning the work of your organisation to make you realise the place the cash comes from and that it’s actual individuals who fund it. That applies to the latest Council member, the latest member of employees in Data Expertise primarily based at The Lodge and essentially the most cynical long run reserve employees from the north of Scotland being dragged down south to do their bit. It’s not all about cash it’s about group spirit and empathy, and I’d say that for the employees attending these few hours of contact time have been value 10 coaching programs. Name me a sentimental previous softie should you like (although I not often have been earlier than!) however the RSPB has to be careful for whether or not it treats everybody as a quantity, as a money cow, as a possible legacy or as an individual. However we’re not going to fall out over this both. I used to be desirous about complaining to the Charity Fee concerning the lack of an in-person AGM however Sir Andrew has been so useful and charming (and it could have been a fruitless grievance I’m positive) that I gained’t try this now.
- Will the RSPB publish its response to the NPPF session on its web site? Or will you present full copies of the response to that and different consultations within the 4 UK nations to members on request? I’d prefer to see what RSPB says to authorities and resolve whether or not or not I agree with it (I’m anticipating that I’ll, however I’d like to make sure).
We don’t normally publish detailed session responses on our web site as they already go into the general public area as a part of the Authorities’s session course of, however I’ve hooked up a replica for you. There’s a abstract within the doc, however lengthy story quick, there’s some good things within the proposals but in addition some that we’ve got challenged. Total, it fails to make sure the nature-friendly planning system that we’d like. That mentioned, that is an interim session. There will likely be a extra substantial one coming within the spring the place I perceive the group have been working onerous to advocate for nature-friendly coverage measures and we’re hopeful that the revised paperwork will likely be improved. We will see.
That’s honest sufficient too, and thanks for saying that you’ve got despatched me the response (besides that doesn’t appear to have occurred!).
Each session is an interim session indirectly and I feel the phrases you may have been given to ship me underplay the significance of the NPPF session. The pace with which it was produced by the brand new authorities and the significance that new authorities attaches to a significant constructing programme means that it is a extremely important second. Be that as it could, when a conservation charity makes an attempt to affect authorities coverage then it’s utilizing the monetary assist of its membership to hunt that affect, and will likely be mentioning the big dimension of its membership or supporter base as added cause why its views ought to be famous by authorities.
The RSPB and different giant NGOs by no means actually inform the membership or public what line they’re taking up consultations, they usually by no means have, however the extra I give it some thought, the stranger that appears. It’s your job to inform me what you assume, not my job to hunt it out on a authorities web site after I don’t know to which consultations the organisation has responded. I’ve considered it a bit because the tiny organisation of which I’m a co-founder and co-director, Wild Justice does publish its responses (right here is our response to the NPPF, and we’ve got printed easy variations of many responses to different consultations previous to the closing of the session with the intention of inspiring our supporters to reply to the session as people). It’s not troublesome to empower supporters to behave for wildlife conservation if they’re cause-led supporters.
I can see why organisations reminiscent of RSPB (the RSPB is just not uncommon on this regard) won’t be eager on publishing their session responses – they’re unlikely to be 100% agreed by 100% of a big membership however that’s an argument of comfort not transparency. When dealing in public coverage, charities ought to be obliged to make their views accessible to the supporters who’ve funded these views being formulated and to the general public whose lives could also be affected by the success or in any other case of the charities’ submissions.
What the RSPB mentioned concerning the NPPF on the on-line AGM (by way of selection) was very uninformative and that partly prompted the query. In fact if it had been an in-person AGM then I may have sought out a member of employees who may inform me a bit extra, and I might need gone away feeling significantly better about it.
There will not be many individuals who would examine what the Wildlife Trusts, RSPB, Woodland Belief and Nationwide Belief say concerning the English planning system however all ought to have the chance. I’d discover a bunch of howlers or issues that show to me that the RSPB has change into a nest of communists if I may see the response. I’d be very shocked if any Council member is aware of what the RSPB mentioned on the NPPF however after all I may be fallacious.
Sir Andrew, you haven’t satisfied me in any respect on this one. All charities speak about transparency and normally are led by the Charity Fee to be clear about cash however that ought to be prolonged to transparency about views.
As a conservation investor, if I discover that the RSPB is speaking garbage with my cash then I’ll make my conservation funding elsewhere. But when I’m delighted by what the RSPB is saying then I’ll improve my funding.
- What plans does the RSPB must row again on its gross sales of fowl meals? I ask as a result of I feel there’s adequate proof for hurt from illness transmission at fowl feeders (and distortion of ecological steadiness) to warrant a change of RSPB place. If you happen to don’t agree then please put me proper on the science. If I spend £20 on fowl meals, how a lot of that’s revenue which might be spent on correct nature conservation – would £2 be a superb guess?
This can be a critical query and one which additionally considerations us. While there are research exhibiting the advantages of supplemental meals for some species by way of enhancing survival throughout chilly climate and, for species reminiscent of Home Sparrow, higher breeding success, there’s combined proof and comprehensible growing public considerations concerning the potential unfavourable results. These results embody an elevated danger of illness transmission from visiting soiled or sure forms of feeders, particularly for finches, and the potential for some specialist species to be outcompeted for nest websites or probably meals by extra dominant generalist species.
Our scientists are presently reviewing the most recent accessible scientific literature on the professionals and cons of supplementary backyard fowl feeding and are conducting area checks for a peer reviewed research. As soon as concluded this can straight inform an replace of the RSPB’s place and follow while additionally highlighting areas the place additional research is required. Our groups in Conservation Science and Business are working collectively carefully on this. From suggestions on the evaluation up to now, we’re anticipating that our present recommendation will change, as will among the merchandise we promote within the first half of 2025.
Sir Andrew, these are all critical questions! And it is a significantly poor reply. The considerations concerning the impacts of fowl feeding on birds are public considerations in that they’re publicly voiced and within the public area, however they don’t solely come from most of the people, they arrive from critical ornithologists on this aspect of the Atlantic and the opposite. RSPB must have reviewed the proof ages in the past and already shaped a view – it’s simply studying and considering in any case.
As a substitute, the response you may have been given to move on to me appears like a authorities division taking part in for time or a vested curiosity calling for proof when there already is sufficient proof on which to behave. In fact, the hazard is that individuals might imagine that the RSPB is appearing as simply that, a vested curiosity, due to your gross sales of fowl feed.
Your reply doesn’t say ‘We’ve checked out this and are positive there’s nothing to fret about’ as a result of that might be a really troublesome place to defend. Nor does it say ‘We’ve checked out this and have already acted in a precautionary approach’ as a result of the RSPB hasn’t. It says, in essence, ‘We’re taking a look at it now’ which suffers from the issue that this difficulty has been sufficiently identified that RSPB (and BTO) must have checked out it earlier.
Why has RSPB not already come to a view, maybe a provisional view? Has the RSPB not come to a view as a result of it’s sluggish on the uptake? That’s not a superb place to be in when each week I appear to get communications from RSPB providing me fowl meals. Or has the RSPB not come to a view as a result of there’s an inside rigidity between fears over impacts on birds and the revenue which promoting fowl meals and fuelling a possible drawback may trigger? That’s not a superb place both. Provided that you consider that the RSPB has moved rapidly and decisively to evaluation this matter is the RSPB in a superb place, and also you don’t say that in your response and should you had I might disagree with you.
The RSPB wants to come back off the fence and may already be on one aspect or the opposite. Possibly you may enquire why that hasn’t occurred? I’ll watch developments with eager curiosity.
Sir Andrew, thanks for replying. I’ll be again along with your different six solutions later this week (on Wednesday and Thursday). Tomorrow I’ll cowl your responses to questions 5 and 6 the place we disagree loads on query 5 and agree quite a bit on query 6, after which on Thurday I’ll handle tour responses to questions 7-10.
Thanks once more.
[registration_form]
