Hi all,
I hope you enjoy walls of poorly written text. If not, try not to read this. It’s lunchtime, I’m bored, and fancy an internet argument. Please don’t take this as a blind defence of the RSPB or of Rainham, both of which do many things I disagree with.
Phil,
I think it might be you as much as anything else. There are obviously changes at Rainham, and I agree that not all are good, but everything changes. In general it’s still a fantastic reserve for the location with good facilities and a welcoming visitor centre.
Yes, staff members come and go, but that can be said of a any organisation and I'd venture that it might be more of an "issue" in a highly competitive, sought-after field such as conservation. People are likely to be high-achieving to get the job in the first place and, when young, more willing to see a job as a step in a larger career. So they move on, and naturally, when much-liked staff members leave any small team, it's a loss that's sorely felt on a personal level. Factor in that a lot of volunteers at any organisation across any sector will volunteer as much for their own reasons (social, experience, enjoyment, etc) as they will for the sheer worthiness of the cause and you have a group that are bound to be pretty susceptible to losses on a personal level. And if staff on desk appear to be upset and you think it’s about a staff member leaving, take it more as a reflection of how good and how well liked that member was rather than how "bad" or "unhappy" the team is as a whole. Another consideration is that even when visiting and volunteering frequently I didn’t get to know or see all the staff on site – there might be fewer staff changes than you or I are actually aware of!
As for the hide being hired out on the day you visited; well, unfortunately, charities have to raise the money they need to do the work they exist to do. All charities have to do this (I work for a small charity in a totally different field). Occasionally hiring out a hide on a nature reserve is probably a very good way to do this, or they wouldn’t be doing it. You can probably argue that these things should maybe be a bit more publicised so that people are aware before travelling, and I can understand your frustration having experienced a similar thing at a rather more expensive reserve run by a different group during the winter, but “disgusting” is a very strong word. Remember that even if your donations/membership/whatever helped to fund a project/hide/etc you’re not, unfortunately, entitled to see it at all times or even on any one given day. Rubbish, but true. The people who hired it out also paid towards the charity’s work and probably paid rather a lot more than you or I have done (assumption).
Viv,
Don’t take this as a panning. It’s not. I just like spewing crap on the internet. So far as I know, the reserve has visitor targets per year, set from higher up in the charity, so they have to work hard to increase visitor numbers. Also, as one of the reserves with the highest footfall it has to be used for education as much as possible and it has to be as accessible as possible for as many people as possible. I suppose the boardwalk in the reeds is a part of this; as one of their open accessible flagship places it's actually rather hard to see very much up close and personal. I think of the reeds directly next to the boardwalk as a bit of a loss-leader, rather like a lot of nature reserves in general. It’s worth remembering that the accessible part of the site is but a fraction of the whole site and that nature reserves often have to be big fundraising and education tools as much as anything else, to fund the charity’s wider conservation work.
And finally, if the reserve doesn’t appeal because it’s too busy or focusses on the wrong things for you, then fine. There are plenty of days when I drive elsewhere to go somewhere with fewer people (fortunately Essex is full of remote places where you can walk for a day and see noone) or don’t fancy going to a reserve where I know people in the centre, etc. On these days I go somewhere else.
Sorry, as I said, it’s lunch time and I’m bored.
John
