I had to join in on this discussion. Here in NYC, there is the New York
City Audubon Society which does a lot of conservation action (not as
militant as I'd like, but that's another post) and the Linnaean Society,
which is totally bird-oriented. They make a point of leaving the
conservation to Audubon, though most Linnaean members are also Audubon
members (and in a host of other organizations such as the ABA and Nature
Conservancy).
However, I remember a meeting where someone mentioned a treasured
birding spot was under threat from developers. That issue never came up
at an Audubon meeting. Well, you should have seen those we-just-do-
birding-leave-conservation-to-Audubon types swing into action! It was
better than almost anything Audubon had done and that land was permanently
saved. I can't help smiling just thinking about it.
The "sitting on their kiesters" accusation could easily have been
made in their direction, but wouldn't have been appropriate at that
moment.
As for the political clout worthy of our numbers. I think that's
growing. Many states are courting birders as a group. The organization
isn't there as it is for other groups, but then, hunting clubs have been
around a lot longer than the Association of Audubon Societies (isn't that
the original name?). I suspect some national issue will really galvanize
everyone. Until then, we'll just act locally (while thinking globally).

Happy bird-day,
Ken

Ken Gale
New York City
nuffsaid at escape.com