Embarrassed by birds: Why conservation groups sometimes think their cause isn't good enough?

I’ve always been surprised by the number of people in the conservation movement who are embarrassed by their cause. This isn’t to say that these people aren’t passionate about the work that they do—you have to be passionate to continue in this universe of low salaries and near-constant disappointment. No, the embarrassment doesn’t stem from a lack of belief in the cause, but more by where they fear it stands in the minds of potential audiences in relation to more exciting issues.

Years ago when I worked at the National Audubon Society, I was talking with a vice president (who had a non-conservation role) about how we could get more people excited about what our organization did. He suggested that we focus on the more charismatic wildlife that lived on our nature preserves: the mountain lions, seals, bears, and elk. “Don’t you think birds are interesting enough?” I asked him, and he looked at me stunned. I’d caught him. He worked for the nation’s leading bird conservation organization, but was embarrassed by birds.

How did this person form the opinion that birds, which so many people find beautiful and compelling, weren’t good enough?

 You’d be surprised how often you find this in the field once you look closely for it. It frequently comes up—as it did in my example—in marketing conversations where people assume that the work of the organization doesn’t sell. Similarly, you see it come up in fundraising, where there’s an interest in chasing people with money whose interests are only tangential to your cause.

There’s definitely an element of imposter syndrome at work here, as well. And this is how embarrassment can work its way into any corner of your organization, even with people who are extremely dedicated to the cause. For instance, your science staff might conceal their enthusiasm because they feel that their work is too esoteric or nerdy for the general public. Or that your work restoring salt marshes isn’t as important as addressing climate change or preventing oil spills.

How do you get past this? Branding is a good start, at least from an institutional perspective. Audubon, for instance, and to its credit, is now squarely focused on birds. Whether the organization’s mission is about whales, trees, park access, environmental justice, or bees, a strong brand should keep your institution’s external messaging focused.

But how you address those members of your staff or board who hedge, perhaps even subconsciously, is more complicated. I think the first step is to make sure these people have permission to speak about the importance of the cause in relation to other causes. This might seem like a small thing, but everyone on your team should understand that there isn’t a competition between your issue and, say, coal mining or toxic waste. It’s OK to say that what you’re doing is important. Even more, it’s OK to be excited about your work, and to show it.

A good second step is to empower your team with facts and figures about the importance of your cause. Again, this might seem obvious, but you would be surprised how many people on your team don’t have ready answers to questions about what your organization does, and aren’t prepared to make an argument for it.

In the end, though, it really comes down to confidence. You and the people you work with should feel confident that what you’re doing is important and worth people’s attention. If you don’t feel that confidence, you need to figure out a way past that. Or find a new line of work.