Category Archives: Gulf Gusher

Culture of Conservation – Keep It Simple, Not Simplistic

Conservation, Culture of Conservation, Gulf Gusher, Opinion, , , , , , , ,

Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler—Albert Einstein

The third principle of the Culture of Conservation is to keep the message simple. Effective marketing is little more than simple messages and images repeated endlessly. Remember the earlier quote that 93% of American children can recognize McDonalds by the golden arches? I wonder what the percentage is now for the Japanese?

McDonalds sponsoring the Osaka sumo basho

Simple messages and images rise above the cacophony that is modern life. Simplicity and volume (both amplitude and amount) help messages battle through the noise. Doubt this? According to the Associated Press, BP’s been spending more than $5 million a week on advertising since the blowout. Remember BPs original simple message? Beyond Petroleum.

Freeman Tilden inspired what we now know as the interpretation profession. Tilden stressed the need for interpreters (guides, museum staff, National Park Service employees and the like) to know their audiences. My impression is that most conservation groups consider their members to be the audience. No wonder the messages are so obtuse, and geared toward fund raising.

Freeman Tilden
Our professional organization for interpretation is the National Association for Interpretation (NAI). I am a NAI supporter, and I am working to have myself certified by them in every way possible (Freeman didn’t write about interpretation until the age of 62). But in recent years Jon Kohl, Sam Ham, and I have been thinking about conservation interpretation, and the need to train staff that can communicate and interpret conservation, not just nature, history, or culture. We have completed organizing the training program, and once I finish with my current NAI certification projects I want to turn my attention to this component of our work.

Why? Because I believe that conservation as a movement is fundamentally inept when it comes to devising ways in which people can relate to our work (another of Tilden’s principals).

Rather than continue to offer Tilden’s principles in a piecemeal fashion, here are the six principles from Interpreting Our Heritage:

1. Any interpretation that does not somehow relate what is being displayed or described to something within the personality or experience of the visitor will be sterile.

2. Information, as such, is not interpretation. Interpretation is revelation based upon information. But they are entirely different things. However, all interpretation include information.

3. Interpretation is an art, which combines many arts, whether the materials presented are scientific, historical, or architectural. Any art is to some degree teachable.

4. The chief aim of interpretation is not instruction but provocation.

5. Interpretation should aid to present a whole rather than a part and must address itself to the whole man rather than any phase.

6. Interpretation addressed to children should not be a dilution of the presentation to adults but should follow a fundamentally different approach. To be at its best it will require a separate program.

NAI offers a number of certification programs, and I endorse them all. Interestingly, most conservation groups do not have certified interpretive staff, a mistake in my opinion. But I also believe that there is a need for us in the profession to develop a certification program in conservation interpretation, a program that does not exist currently. For those interested in where we have taken this idea, there is information here on the Fermata blog.

The key to successful simplification, however, is (as Einstein said) to keep things simple but not too simple. In conservation we deal with complex issues like global warming, oil spills, biodiversity, and extinction. These topics do not lend themselves to simplicity. Yet, as Tilden stated, our presentations, programs, and messages must address the desires, experiences, and limitations of our audiences. In this way I agree with Tilden that interpretation is an art, one practiced well by a few. Read Enos Mills, Aldo Leopold, Edward Abbey, and Peter Matthiessen to get a sense of the interpretive art as it relates to conservation.

Enos Mills
This helps us understand the recent debate here about the Ted Williams’ article in Audubon, and Drew Wheelan’s reports for the American Birding Assocation. Williams is a journalist, a master craftsman. His work can be judged by its lucidness and accuracy. Unfortunately, as journalism Williams’ article failed miserably. Drew did not pretend to be a journalist; instead, he functioned as an observer. Drew placed himself in situations in the Gulf that allowed us to experience the blowout and its impacts through his eyes. Yes, Drew is passionate about his work, an attribute that contributes to effective interpretation. Williams debated facts and completely missed the story. Drew didn’t sweat every fact and captured the story in all of its horror, devastation, and pathos.

The National Park Service (NPS) has devised an equation to show the key components that go into the interpretive experience – (Kr + Ka) X AT = IO. Remember, however, that this is metaphor, not math. The equation states that a knowledge of the resource (Kr) plus a knowledge of the audience (Ka), multiplied by well-grounded interpretive techniques (AT), will create an interpretive opportunity (IO). The equation is often displayed as a teeter-totter, where an overemphasis on one factor, such as knowledge of the resource, can outweigh and overwhelm the audience and any interpretive technique. In my experience this is the chief failing of conservation groups. Yes, they can all impress with a knowledge of the resources, but most have no concept of how to communicate that knowledge or a conservation imperative to the audience.

Let’s recap. I have now presented three of the Culture of Conservation principles:

1. Take it to the street
2. Make space for place
3. Keep it simple, not simplistic

Keep tuned for the next principle – Aim straight for the heart.

Ted Eubanks
15 Sep 2010

The Culture of Conservation – Taking it to the Street

Conservation, Culture of Conservation, Gulf Gusher, Opinion, Politics, Recreation, , , , , ,

The most important environmental issue is one that is rarely mentioned, and that is the lack of a conservation ethic in our culture—Gaylord Nelson

Gifford Pinchot popularized, rather than coined, the word conservation. He placed his mark on the word by combining conservation with ethic, embedding his concept of conservation in an almost forgotten book The Fight for Conservation. Aldo Leopold followed with the Land Ethic which states that conservation is a state of harmony between men and land. For the past century American conservation has heeded these tenets.

Yet even Leopold spoke of the difficulties in applying these rules, these ethics. In Land Ethic Leopold asks the following:

Despite nearly a century of propaganda, conservation still proceeds at a snail’s pace; progress still consists largely letterhead pieties and conventional oratory. On the back forty we still slip two steps backward for each forward stride. The usual answer to this dilemma is ‘more conservation education.’ No one will debate this, but is it certain that on the volume of education needs stepping up? Is something lacking in the content as well?

Walter Russell Mead has recently written that the environmental movement has “become the voice of the establishment, of the tenured, of the technocrats.” Leopold spoke of “letterhead pieties and conventional oratory.” Edward Abbey said “that which today calls itself science gives us more and more information, and indigestible glut of information, and less and less understanding.” What all are saying (or at least implying) is that conservation, to remain relevant, must constantly evolve. Yet as conservation has become more business and less movement, the forces constraining evolution have become increasingly restrictive and dampening. At these junctures evolution must become revolution.

Over a decade ago I served on the board of the National Audubon Society. One spring we met in Jamestown, North Dakota, where we continued with our debates and discussions about a new strategic plan for the Society. I recall sitting in the Holiday Inn, unable to sleep, and slipping over to my computer to write a section of the plan that I called the culture of conservation. Although the board at that time adopted my thoughts, not long after I left the board the concept vacated as well.

Now I want my idea back.

As I have written before, the conservation and environmental movements (which I will simplify to movement) have been signaled onto the wrong track. I will avoid the Casey Jones analogy, but my message is the same. I see trouble ahead, and trouble behind. Once an organic, social phenomenon, the movement has sacrificed its soul in the pursuit of efficiency and currency. Most environmental organizations are well-meaning, highly educated, and effectively isolated from the fabric of everyday life in America.

Here are a few off-the-cuff examples. In the U.S. two out of three Americans are white, non-Hispanic (according to the census bureau). About 16% of Americans are Hispanic, and around 13% are black. I know of no environmental organization, agency, or department where employment or membership remotely reflects these percentages. The environmental movement, save environmental justice, remains lily white.

In the U.S., only 27 percent of the population has earned a college degree. Only 8.9 percent of Americans have a Masters’ Degree and only 3 percent have earned a PhD. Yet the conservation and resource agencies and organizations usually require an advanced degree as a term of employment. We are white and egg-heads.

Environmental threats occur in every state. In recent years, for example, the Gulf of Mexico (Katrina, Ike, the BP gusher, the dead zone) has been a hot spot. Rural communities are often disproportionately at risk, for example the Marcellus Shale play in Pennsylvania and New York states. Yet the national environmental groups office in the largest cities in the U.S., and at the edges of the country. Here are a few examples:

National Audubon Society – New York City
Defenders of Wildlife – Washington D.C.
National Wildlife Federation – Washington D.C.
American Bird Conservancy – Washington D.C.
Environmental Defense Fund – New York City
The Conservation Fund – Washington D.C.
Defenders of Wildlife – Washington D.C.
The Trust for Public Land – San Francisco
The Sierra Club – San Francisco

I remember an Audubon board meeting that I helped arrange in McAllen, Texas. The board and dozens of staff members would be coming to southmost Texas for this meeting. I recall one of the young female staff members cornering me before the meeting, asking me if it would be safe to drink the water.

I mention this not to embarrass the Audubon staff. I only want to illustrate my point about the groups being culturally, educationally, and geographically remote.

The environmental problems and threats we face in this country are relevant to everyman, not just white, educated urbanites. The average American earns less than $40,000 annually, does not have a college education, and is left wondering why he or she should give a damn about something as amorphous and ill-defined as global warming. We in the environmental movement may be convinced of the facts, and smugly certain of our position, but science does not win elections or hearts. The average American must understand enough to care, and care enough to vote. At this moment, he and she do neither.

You say you want a revolution? Begin and end with the people.

Lincoln said:

I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.

By real facts Lincoln did not mean the obscure, confusing, and tiresome arguments that only serve to alienate our audience. For example, I believe that most people understand that millions of gallons of oil pouring into the Gulf of Mexico is not a good thing. What most do not understand are the endless arguments between experts. We speculate about lost oil while Governor Barbour howls about lost jobs. We debate the pros and cons of cleaning birds while Governor Jindal promises to clean house. We aim for the head, they for the heart.

I realize that the terms grassroots and ground up are hackneyed and shopworn. This does not mean that the words are not true, even if overused. Few of the national environmental organizations are of the grassroots form. Sierra has a local chapter structure, and a few have state offices. Audubon had the most distributed, community-level organization of them all, with hundreds of local chapters. Yet over the past several years Audubon has moved away from chapters and more toward state offices and centers. The Tea Party has shown the efficacy of working at the community, even district, level. Our movement, in contrast, has spent the last decade consolidating and distancing itself from the hoi polloi.

Here is an example. A close friend in Houston wrote me to ask about volunteer opportunities to help with the Gulf gusher. Her daughter had a few free weeks of summer break to spend, and she desperately wanted to help. She called Audubon and asked about opportunities, and received the fundraising spiel in return. Ted Williams recently wrote in Audubon magazine that “the very last thing Gulf Coast birds need are well-meaning amateurs crashing through nesting habitat.” Dead wrong, Ted. What the movement needs is those 17,000 potential volunteers to become crusaders, and what better way to engage them than through their willingness to pitch in and help. We would all agree that nesting areas would be off limits to the uninitiated. But that leaves the vast majority of the shore eligible for cleaning by volunteers.

Our movement has become Conservation Inc. We need to step forward to the past, and spark conservation back to life.

Walter Russell Mead notes the following:

Intellectually and culturally, environmentalists came out of the same movement as critics of crude urban development like Jane Jacob (The Death and Life of Great American Cities). They celebrated the diverse local, small-scale adaptations that reflected the knowledge of communities as opposed to the grandiose plans of the social engineers.

Precisely. Jane Jacobs dug in against Robert Moses and the planners who would have stripped New York of the diversity that is its hallmark. She worked at the neighborhood level, yet argued that her concepts also had application on a global scale. Jacobs spent her life concerned with city culture, and the ways in which enlightened, empowered citizens can persevere. I will argue that conservation is a community as well, peopled by well meaning, dedicated citizens that simply need to be empowered, enlightened, and appreciated.

A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has—Margaret Mead

Yes, a small group of people can provoke a cultural shift. Change is contingent on these provocateurs, the tiny legion willing to face friend and foe alike. My previous article focused on one of these provocateurs, Drew Wheelan. Drew is a person willing to allow the public to see a problem (the Gulf gusher) through his eyes. We need more of his kind to help us drag this movement out of the muck. I am not arguing that the ecocrats and Conservation Inc. should go away. We need all the help we can get. I am arguing, though, that we need to quickly reintroduce ourselves to our neighbors and ask for their help, not just their money. In this we are years behind, so we have little time to waste.

This is just the first part of a rewriting of conservation and the movement that needs to take place. Future articles will address additional steps in the process. But without the public, there is no movement. Let’s take it to the street.

Ted Lee Eubanks
10 Sep 2010

Wounds To The Salt

Conservation, Gulf Gusher, Opinion, Politics, , ,

Royal tern and black skimmer, Galveston, Texas, Ted Lee Eubanks
Now that I have identified my hit list (the 25 species of birds that I feel most at risk from the Gulf gusher), which are these are most threatened? Here is the latest from the National Fish and Wildlife Federation (NFWF).

The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) announced today a major project to provide critical wetland habitat for migratory birds affected by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. With a $2.5 million investment from NFWF’s Recovered Oil Fund for Wildlife, NFWF will join with Ducks Unlimited and others to establish the wetlands on farms and other private lands along the Gulf coast. These alternative habitats outside of the spill area will provide habitat for millions of migratory birds that will soon descend upon the region.

NFWF, DU, and others will develop freshwater wetlands in the interior to protect ducks, geese, and migratory freshwater shorebirds from the impacts of the gusher. Fantastic, I am all for it. Except my hit list birds would not be expected outside the “spill area.” I support any effort to enhance wetlands (particularly in the agricultural interior), but the benefit from this project to many of the birds most impacted by the gusher will be negligible.

The birds most at risk at those that are either salinity tolerant or saline obligates. The more restricted the bird is to the tidal zone, the more restricted it is to the beach, the more the bird is at risk. Yes, a hurricane would change the threat considerably, particularly if the storm surge pushed oil into the interior. But without such a storm (and assuming the BP finally caps the damn thing), the tidal zone (along with the open waters of the Gulf) is where we would expect the greatest impact and threat.

Therefore the birds at the top of my list are those that are non-migratory, saline obligates. In other words, these birds are restricted to the tidal zone and remain throughout the year.

Clapper rail
American oystercatcher
Black skimmer
Horned lark (coastal)
Seaside sparrow

There are others that spend their lives in the tidal zone, yet individuals may migrate to the south in winter (hopefully out of harm’s way).

Mottled duck
Neotropic cormorant
Reddish egret
Roseate spoonbill
Snowy plover (coastal breeders)
Wilson’s plover
Least tern (coastal breeders)
Royal tern

The next group breeds in the interior, yet winters in the tidal zone. Most of these birds are capable of making non-stop flights between where they nest and where they winter. In other words, they do not depend on interior staging areas during migration. Others, like the whooping crane, stage their migrations, and “refuel” en route.

Whooping crane
Piping plover
Red knot
Nelson’s sharp-tailed sparrow

There are also species that are interior breeders that pass through the Gulf. These birds are only at risk during the seasons of passage (fall and spring).

Fulvous whistling-duck
Franklin’s gull
Black tern

The following birds winter in the open waters of the Gulf and the near shore (bays and estuaries), yet breed long distances to the north.

Lesser scaup
Red-breasted merganser
Common loon
Eared grebe
Northern gannet

American oystercatcher, Galveston, Texas, Ted Lee Eubanks
None of these species will benefit from enhanced duck ponds away from the coast. The question is just what is being done for those most at risk? A few of these species, such as whooping crane and piping plover, are already endangered and their populations have little wiggle room. Others, such as the American oystercatcher, are low-density, year-round residents. What is being planned for these species? Migrants are beginning to arrive on the Gulf now.

Cleaning crews in Grand Isle trashed least tern nesting sites. BP incinerated sea turtles along with oil from the gusher. We do not need another round of ham-fisted trial and error. We need specific, targeted results. My fear is that the people who know the Gulf the best are being kept on the sidelines because of politics, ignorance, ego, and fear. These are not BPs beaches. These are not BPs waters. These are not BPs marshes. Let’s get the best and brightest from the Gulf (rather than from Wall Street or DC) into the mix now.
One last comment. Why did I leave brown pelican off of the hit list? Yes, it is as threatened as any of these, but the press has already brought its plight to the public’s attention. I am concerned about those species (such as American oystercatcher) that are obscure and unknown outside of the birding world. Those high-profile game birds with large advocacy support (ducks and geese) will always be helped. What about those who do not have such panache?
Ted Lee Eubanks
9 July 2010

Fine, Smart Ass, What Would You Do?

Conservation, Gulf Gusher, Opinion, Politics, , , , , ,
Snowy plover, Quivira NWR, Kansas, Ted Lee Eubanks

I thought that you would never ask.

Look at the list of imperiled birds again. Most share a habitat type. When the oil has oozed its last, habitat will still be these birds most pressing need. I agree with the sentiment behind Paul Kemp’s (National Audubon Society) comment that “here, we have a patient that’s dying of cancer, you know, and now they have a sunburn, too,” but Paul, choose your words (and analogies) more carefully next time. The grotesque wetland losses in Louisiana began before the gusher. The dead zone in the Gulf existed before the gusher. The 27000 abandoned wells in the Gulf existed before the gusher. The incessant nipping away at coastal beaches existed before the gusher. Only this time, at least for a moment, a catastrophic event has shined the light into America’s backyard.

Enough carping. What should we do? First, we need protected, untrammeled beaches. A number of the birds on my list (piping, snowy, and wilson’s plovers, red knot) spend most of their lives in or around a beach or sand flat. The driftwood that is removed by beach groomers (you know, a sun tan requires an immaculate beach) gives these birds a place to roost, particularly during high winds. An open beach should not be a race track. Protect these birds, and their beaches, and you protect a number of other birds and wildlife as well (ruddy turnstone, sanderling, western sandpiper).

Second, protect and enhance (i.e., expand) the Gulf coastal habitats where these birds nest. In the case of least terns and black skimmers, the protected beach complex will do the trick. It is critical, though, to conserve the beach/bay habitat in its entirety. On Galveston Island, the depressed economy has opened the door to conserve tracts from beach to bay. People like Karla Klay and Artist Boat have been trying every trick in the book to raise funds for an acquisition, and have had the door slammed in their faces. This is not an isolated incident. There are wonderful local conservation groups around the Gulf trying to save these lands, their heritage, and the support they receive is pitifully small.

Other birds (such as brown pelicans and reddish egrets) need their colonial nesting areas and rookeries protected. Predator control, public use limitations, and structural enhancements are all in order. Groups like Audubon (national and local) protect a number of these critical islands and marshes. For example, the Houston Audubon Society maintains North Deer Island, Bolivar Flats, Horseshoe Marsh, and the High Island sanctuaries (and more) for birds. Let’s give them the support they need to do the job.

Third, it’s about the wetlands, stupid. Approximately half the nation’s original wetland habitats have been lost over the past 200 years. Louisiana’s wetlands today represent about 40 percent of the wetlands of the continental United States, but about 80 percent of the losses. Stop it. Replumb the Mississippi (and while you are at it, deal with the agricultural and urban runoff that is killing the Gulf). Finish the Everglades, and then make the Mississippi (and the Missouri, while we are on the subject) right. If the Gulf is an industrial park, the Mississippi is a highway and sewer.

Fourth, in order to accomplish the above put Americans to work. Roosevelt named the CCC accurately – the Citizens Conservation Corps. We have millions who are desperate for work, and many have exactly the skills to help us restore the Gulf, its tributaries, and its wetlands. Give them a chance.

Franklin's gull, Quivira NWR, KS, Ted Lee Eubanks

Fifth, involve citizens in monitoring this spill and the health of the Gulf. The Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology (CLO) and eBird are great places for birders to start. You may not live on or visit the Gulf, but you can monitor these indicator species when they are in your extended neighborhood. No, these are not backyard birds, but many may be near you during migration or breeding season. For example, Franklin’s gulls pass in phenomenal numbers through the Great Plains, and declines in their population are worrisome. Snowy plovers that nest in Kansas winter along the Gulf. Piping plovers that nest in North Dakota winter in Texas. We need to know what is happening throughout their ranges. Get out, go look, and give back what you see.

Sixth, your backyard does matter. I know, I keep dissing (I picked this word up from by grandson, Woodrow) the National Wildlife Federation (NWF), and I doubt that I will stop as long as these insipid fundraising campaigns continue. But I do like their backyard habitat program for a simple reason. Recreation is, for most Americans, the pathway to nature. There is no recreational venue closer than your home or heart. Birds at a backyard feeder are a portal, a rabbit hole, through which people can easily pass into the natural world. If we are going to have any chance of connecting Americans to nature, to biodiversity, I believe that it must start close to home. NWF needs to focus on backyard connections, and groups like the American Birding Association (ABA) need to promote recreation as the pathway. We must nurture public sentiment and support if we are going to have any hope of changing political policy.

Finally, policy and politics matter. I like how the American Bird Conservancy (ABC) has been increasingly proactive in asserting its policy recommendations. A place to start would be to enforce existing regulations, and to insure that these programs are adequately funded. Opponents know that you kill a policy by starving it. As I have said previously, the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is a classic example (the Wilderness Society has prepared a great fact sheet about the chronic underfunding of this program). The Endangered Species Act (ESA) funding is abysmal. The National Estuary Program on the Gulf (such as the Barataria-Terrebonne NEP) needs a boost. We need progressive, dedicated, well-funded organizations, policies, and programs to restore the Gulf, not empty promises and platitudes. BP’s fines should not fall into the congressional black hole. Let’s invest in the Gulf and its people, now.

Ted Lee Eubanks
8 July 2010

Screwed – Birds in BP’s Crosshairs

Conservation, Gulf Gusher, Opinion, Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Neotropic cormorant, Galveston, Texas, Ted Lee Eubanks
The popular press apparently believes that the brown pelican is the only species being jeopardized by the Gulf gusher (someone please let Anderson Cooper know). The NWF would like for you to believe the threat is to the birds in your backyard. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been quoted saying “the distribution of the oil, it’s bigger and uglier than we had hoped.”

Just which birds are actually threatened by the BP fiasco? I will offer my best guesses, and then ask you to send your thoughts in as well. I will try to keep the list updated.

My list of 25 reflects those species that are generally limited to the immediate coast, whose populations are generally restricted to the Gulf of Mexico and the southern U.S. Atlantic (either throughout the year or during a specific season), and whose numbers are low and/or declining. In general I have avoided all pelagics (obviously threatened), since their numbers are relatively low in the Gulf (excepting the Dry Tortugas).

Of course, if we have a repeat of the storm surge associated with a Katrina, Rita, or Ike, all bets are off. Such a storm would push oil well inland, and an entirely new suite of birds would be at risk. In addition, an Ike-type storm, moving from east to west, would spread surface oil and put the Texas coast more at risk. If that happened (particularly if the oil makes it to the southern tip of the state) then all whooping cranes are at risk, as well as the species such as redhead that winter in the Laguna Madre.

Speculation about possible impacts from a hurricane have been all over the map. Here is a quote from Dr. Jeff Masters of Weather Underground. I urge all to read his entire article. His discussion of the potential effect of storm surge is enlightening (and frightening). As one with a house on Galveston Island, and the unwilling recipient of 3 feet of storm surge from Ike, I can only imagine the impacts of oil floating atop those waters.

A hurricane moving through the Gulf of Mexico spill will very likely make the disaster much worse, spreading out the oil over a larger region, and bringing the oil to shores that otherwise might not have seen oil…Jeff Masters

Even if all of the oil evaporated tomorrow (we wish), the Deepwater Horizon blowout is a moment when the America people can see what is at risk from treating the Gulf as if it were an industrial park.

    Reddish egret, Galveston, Texas, Ted Lee Eubanks

  • Fulvous whistling-duck
  • Mottled duck
  • Lesser scaup
  • Red-breasted merganser
  • Common loon
  • Eared grebe
  • Northern gannet
  • Neotropic cormorant
  • Reddish egret
  • Roseate spoonbill
  • Clapper rail
  • Whooping crane (Florida)
  • Snowy plover
  • Wilson’s plover
  • Piping plover
  • American oystercatcher
  • Red knot
  • Franklin’s gull
  • Least tern
  • Black tern
  • Royal tern
  • Black skimmer
  • Horned lark (coastal)
  • Nelson’s sharp-tailed sparrow
  • Seaside sparrow