|
Conservation groups come and go. Why? |
|
|
|
|
Written by PAT MUNDAY, Writers on the Range
|
|
Tuesday, 01 July 2008 |
Everyone who's been involved in the environmental movement has seen it happen.
Over the past 20 years or so I've been affiliated with at least a dozen groups,
and I've seen it happen several times.
I'm talking about
professionalization. It begins when a group of grassroots activists begins to
feel overwhelmed. They can't keep up with the reams of data, hours of tedious
meetings or the technical complexity of the issues they track. Then somebody
dies and leaves the group a bundle of money, or one of the members hits the
jackpot with a grant proposal. The solution is obvious to everyone: Hire
professional staff.
At a small foundation devoted to a particular local
river, we hired a part-time executive director. The arrangement began well
enough. The executive director attended board meetings, listened to the members'
concerns, and did a fine job at representing the group's interests to agencies
and the public. Working only 20 hours or so per month, our director also
insisted that officers and board members stay engaged with particular
issues.
A professional raised more money, leveraged the group's funds
and garnered more grants. The executive director and fundraiser became full
time, and they in turn needed help from a treasurer, secretary, newsletter
editor and assistant.
Maybe the board members got lazy. With a
professional staff, there was no longer a pressing need to stay personally
informed and involved. Or maybe the professional staff developed its own agenda.
Today, that group seems to have lost its focus, board members serve in name only
and the staff salaries are rapidly depleting the treasury. The first priority
seems to be paying the bills and staff and not protecting the
river.
Members and officers feel that they now work for the staff. At
board meetings, the executive director runs the show and gives the marching
orders, which is fine, since the officers don't want to be burdened with
leadership. It's fine that their job is to raise money at the annual banquet,
place calls to members and other potential donors, show up at public hearings to
read scripted comments, and sign their name to bulk-printed letters.
In
other cases, over time, I’ve seen an insidious shift in a group's priorities.
Chasing grant opportunities from special interests can lead to mission drift. I
once belonged to a watershed group created to bring ranchers and
conservationists together in order to keep more water in a river for an
endangered native fish. But then the weeds took over. This group, too began with
just a part-time facilitator. Over time, the position blossomed into a full-time
job, aided by a secretary and an intern or two.
Weeds were a major
concern for the ranchers, and initially it was easy enough for everyone to
support a little weed-whacking coordination with agencies and local governments.
Then the weed coordinator became a full-time position, and the group now puts a
lot of energy into a major annual fundraiser to buy herbicides (and fund the
weed coordinator), and there is never enough time, money or effort to go around.
Last I heard, the group was advertising for a grant writer in hopes of keeping
everyone employed. Like other groups, the staff makes the decisions and board
meetings are an exercise in passive listening.
One of the first
environmental groups I helped form was determined to get a fair remedy at a
local Superfund site. Another volunteer obtained a grant from the
Environmental Protection Agency to fund an expert that could help us understand
the technical issues. Over time, the experts came and went, until one discovered
there was more funding for activities like a newsletter and a website. Soon, our
expert and his employees were running the organization from his office 80 miles
away. Board meetings consisted of said expert presenting an agenda of work
items.
The few members -- including myself -- who disagreed with the new
agenda were shunned. Heaven forbid there should be substantial, time-consuming
argument and discussion at a board meeting. Heaven forbid that ideas should move
from the membership up to the staff. The staff needed to "maintain a good
working relationship" with agency personnel and with other groups -- even groups
that were fundamentally opposed to our mission.
It's a pattern:
Disgruntled members like me move on. After a year or two of chill time, we'll
become passionate about some new issue. We'll join another grassroots group --
or maybe start a new one. Much like those tree seedlings, we hope to plant
something that will bear fruit, and not just turn into dead wood.
Pat
Munday is a contributor to Writers on the Range, a service of High Country News
(hcn.org). He is an environmentalist in southwest Montana.
 |
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 01 July 2008 )
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed