Getting Serious about Conservation lock

close
more_vert
FourWinds F
FourWinds Nov 5, 2003 21:43:33
Replying to nigelswift

Perhaps a (dread the thought) committee of folks who decide if a group/person can use the 'Name' would be a better idea than a more corporate type arrangement then. A simple system of put your case to us and we'll let you know. If approval follows then the campaign gets to use the group's name.

However, when someone uses the name they will be asked "What do you stand for then?" or some such question and you have to be able to give a solid answer to that one - hence a (broad if necessary) charter to point them at.

As you say (and BN knows) it takes a hell of a lot of time just to organise and fight one battle, but to take on many is a mad task. Would it be more prudent to locate one cause and fight that out and move on to others after that? Hopefully, riding on the back of a success!

B BrigantesNation
BrigantesNation Nov 5, 2003 21:59:03
Replying to FourWinds

As usual 4W is dead right, working on a single campaign is a lot of work in itself but would give the group a track record.

Also I would be careful about leaving out the historical stuff. If a site was for example surrounded by DMV's and so Roman stuff. by fighting to preserve these might help the case of the ancient monument in question. Often you are fighting a tide of local ignorance and by switching to a new item of heritage under threat you can bring people round a lot easier to the idea of it being an area of important heritage.