What is the role of a conservation organisation in debate around national public projects? A great piece from my friend, Matt, on the stance of the RSPB. I find the case in the extract below particularly uplifting - all too often ‘conservation’ gets itself confused with ‘conservatism’ and panders to NIMBYism. Great work, RSPB.
Over the past couple of weeks I’ve come across a lot of public projects that the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has had an outspoken public opinion on. The voice of a conservation organization making mainstream media is a very welcome sight. At times, however, the position can be a little more complicated than just sticking up for the interests of wildlife.
…
Today, a piece in the Guardian focuses on local residents’ criticisms of the RSPB which is refusing to oppose plans for wind turbines near its Bempton Cliffs seabird colony reserve. The RSPB sensibly says that there is no evidence the wind turbines will have an adverse effect on wildlife and that “in wider terms, energy from windpower is clean and renewable, and if there is one overwhelming threat to wildlife and conservation, it is global warming.” I couldn’t agree more that the conservation movement should stop cutting off its nose to spite its face when it comes to renewable energy developments. However, local residents seem disappointed that their nimbyism can’t freeride on the back of concerns about wildlife.
-
tomyoungman reblogged this from mattadamwilliams and added:
conservation organisation...debate around national public projects?
-
tomyoungman liked this
-
mattadamwilliams posted this
